Empathy

Dear Dialecticians (and colleagues across the curriculum),

Re last class concern with empathy, Empathize THIS:
 
                              x Y z
 
 Y stands for the action-of- relationship: relativity,
relay, ratio, rationalizing, linking, bridging, sparking, 
connecting, conversing, marrying, mediating .between
any x and any z, any “this” and any “that.” any noun
and any other noun, any name and any other name,
any label and any other label, any thing and any other
things, any person and any other persons...
 
                        -Ification
 
Reified:        Y's function is sometimes represented
                        by  coyote, raven...
Personified: Y 's operations are often  represented
                        by Trickster, Clown,   Jester, Juggler,
                        Fool, Loki, Eshu...
Deified:       Y's necessities could be represented by
                         Hermes,  Mercury, Jesus, Prometheus
                         and any mediator between gods &
                         humans, heaven and earth.
 
Grammatically: let's say  Y 's role is represented by -ing.
 
                           
 
Call  the S curve separating yin and yang: Y.
(Who pays attention to that? I'm asking.
That’s my point. Y is transparent.
Ignored. Neglected.
Overlooked.)
 
Interaction
Intercourse
Interface
Interesting
 
The IDEA -Y is manifested by “holy ghost,” spirit of the whole,
wind, air, breath: crossroads (Y)--where 3 ways meet  
(tri-via: trivial), crux and crucial: inter-section,
juncture, joint.  
 
Let me show you how invisible (transparent) Y is to normal
relations (y) with each other and with the world: a trivial &
representative example of collective ignore-ance generated by
conventions of thought and speech—linguistic  addiction, habit...
 
                           
 
I sit on a rock.
I call the rock “hard.”  Anybody does.
 
BUT Actually it's  the relationship (Y) between  my
butt and rock that generates “hardness” (an always emerging
phenomena). Unaware of my participation, I  give the rock
all the credit, blame, responsibility for Hardness.
 
I scapegoat the rock! I  reduce a ternary dynamic
(me-Y-rock) to a  binary dualism (me/rock) and slap
the adjective  “hard” on the  rock  which, all by itself
(ding an sich: like unheard trees  falling in woods),  is
neither hard nor not hard, soft nor not soft..
 
Trivial?
 
You are soooo good looking.
You are such a jerk.
You are so kind.
Rude,
Terrifying
Interesting....
 
All examples of Calling-the-Rock-Hard, reducing
a ternary dynamic (relationship) to a binary dualism
and slapping the  OTHER (z) with  what is always
actually a matter of Y – the super-ordinate relay,
ratio, relativity going on & on between any
YOU  and the Other (or Else).
 
So...what? You might ask.
 
Y-awareness might be a significant way to talk about
the empathy issue.   Awkward, sure.  To tell someone 
they've got good Y-awareness  is itself a
Butt-Calling-the-Rock-Hard
kind of a deal.
 
You can see how hard it is to factor-in the Y-Factor.
And yet is the glue, link, spark, bridge, hook-up,
connection, relay, relativity, ratio, rational reason
I make sense, the sense I make—me, necessary
but not sufficient in every  transaction.  True?  
 
In the mean time, we all might be said to be living
an  epistemological lie—as Bateson (from whom
this insight flows) calls it:  not that it matters  if
we're in it together —ignoring our ignore-ance 
and collective confusion:  sanctified & sealed  in
convention, convenience, cave, closet,  box, bubble
—however you want to  represent our solidarity:
binary-izing ternaries, reducing triads to dualities,
rocks to hard places.

                           y Y y

              
  
xxxooo, Sam