LANGUAGE AS TRANSLATATION

  “The more I see, the less I know
The more I like to let it go” —Snow

“I ran my mouth off a bit too much, oh, what did I say?
Well, you just laughed it off, it was all okay”— float on

Have you ever seen Red? Or ever said, "I didn’t mean that!" when getting called out by a loved one for saying—screaming, more likely—something so shocking, hurtful, and energy-intensive that it’s pretty obvious that you did, in fact, mean it at the time.[1]? were you just “speaking without thinking?”- how does one do that precisely? These phrases intrinsically propose more questions than they answer, yet everyone understands what you mean when you say them.. My favorite of these is the concept of "speaking without thinking", I love this phrase—I roll it around my tongue whenever I find myself bored. It has immense layers of texture to it because, when you really sink your teeth into it, it’s essentially an apology for being too accurate in translating an impulse of feeling into words. The phrase fundamentally gives up the game in terms of the actual purpose of language, which within the intent of the phrase, thinking," is revealed to be to purposely mistranslate feeling rather than to accurately communicate feeling. Speak without thinking" is to have "feeling" as an imprisoned dissident, temporally free to speak without going through the tyrannical filter of the censorship of "thought It reveals that language is fundamentally used as a form of utility—a tool you use for a purpose of interest. you cannot say “what you feel” because feeling cannot actually be said. Only an approximate translation of sorts of the impulse of emotion or feeling can be spoken. Majority of the time this mistranslation of impulse is not so so cynically cold and self interest motivated, we are vastly unaware of what we actually mean when we claim to say what we feel or think. The space between unconscious impulse (feelings, “unconscious” thoughts, subliminal cravings and wants, electric shocks of the nerves) and conscious transmogrification of said impulses into first basic Conscious recognition of said impulses very existence, then  secondly, initiating the process from basic recognition of the impulse from the unconscious to a deliberately  shaped approximate expression of said impulse, is barely recognized as existing much less Machiavellianly manipulated to deceive

[1] “At the time” is an odd little phrase. It can be used as a reason for an individual action taken, “it seemed like a good idea at the  time”, or to explain/justify a worldview of a personality from the past “listen I know he was a racist, but he was just a man of his time” time is  even used as a possessive wide ranging descriptor  whenever a particular piece of art or opinionated essay is described as a “sign of the times, voice of a generation, the best X of the [Current year]”. All of these terms and verbiage implicitly give to “Time” a sense of physical space where one can find themselves “at” “of” or “in”. This also implicitly breaks apart the common notion of “ free-will” because almost every use of the concept of time in a word, phrase , or thought puts the speaker in subservience to time. you only do things you have “time to do”(resource of the speaker) or “if time will allow me”(possessor of the speaker). Time is something we both possess and are possessed by. When you use “at the time” as a reason for a decision, what you are implicitly admitting to is that your actions are not a product of your mind freely generating an action or decision from pure reason or thought- rather your actions and thoughts are predicated by the “time” they are acted or thought within, the mind is a reactive participant in this case not a proactive one. You can only think or act in reaction to proactive stimulants from the particular pocket of time you have found yourself within; The brain is the never-ending chain of second steps of a Anterograde Amnesiac.

people. this space between feeling and thought, of impulse/speech does not exist- to them, these exist synonymously as one thing. this why relationships all over are riddled with miscommunications- or more accurately, mistranslations. To miscommunicate is to know what you are trying to say someone but not knowing how to say it in ways they understand, to “mistranslate” is to not actually know what the unconscious impulsive imputes for your thoughts even are, but thinking that you do and building your whole train of logic and conscious thought on the mistranslated interpretation of the unconscious impulse that was the very imputes for starting the train of thought to be begin with. This whole trainwrecked process is only exasperated by the persistent idea that the mind is the master, and that consciousness is more trustworthy and healthy than unconscious instinct when, in reality, consciousness is in many ways fundamentally dysgenic[1]- or as the father of the underground himself, Dostoyevsky puts it.

"I swear to you, sirs, that excessive consciousness is a disease--a genuine, absolute disease."

 To understand how consciousness relates to the unconscious, one must model it as a surfer on a wave. The conscious mind "directs" what we know to be our actions, using the propelled momentum of the "waves" of instincts and impulses generated from the vast "ocean" of the unconscious. We can imagine a little boy tugging at the shirt of his father as they look on at the surfer. "Daddy Daddy! Look! Look! He’s controlling the wave! We, along with the father, know that the boy’s description of what he is seeing is false. The boy is mistaking the effect for the cause. The surfer did not generate this wave, nor can he shift its intensity or direction. In reality the surfer can only contort his body in angles that distribute his weight harmoniously with the force and direction of the wave. He must be constantly Intune with the wave, he must, in a sense, always be “listening” to the wave. If he “mistranslates” which way this or that current of the wave is going or tries turning his board in a direction that is incongruent with rest of the wave- he wipes out. In this sense the unconscious is always “setting the tone” and the conscious surfer must always follow its stead. The reason why the conscious is so weak to the sheer force and scale of the unconscious is because the human Brain simply does not have the processing power to consciously think out every movement or thought through precise reason, and if it did, why would it waste the energy on aspects that could be easily automated? Everything worth doing- everything that is healthy, is best done when the action is entuned and embodied by the unconscious impulse; when you tell your girl you want to have kids and she responds with a “I need to think about it” your rational mind may brush it off as reasonable, but that visceral feeling of pain pounding the heart within your chest knows far more than your mind when it hears those words of hesitation. The truth does not speak- it has no need for words; Spengler puts it beautifully

When the ordinary thought of a highly cultivated people begins to regard "having children ’ as a question of pro's and cons, the great turning-point has come For Nature knows nothing of pro and con Everywhere, wherever life is ACTUAL, reigns an inward organic logic, an ‘it,” a drive, that is utterly independent of waking-being, with its causal linkages, and indeed not even observed by it The abundant proliferation of primitive peoples is a natural phenomenon, which is not even thought about, still less judged as to its utility or the reverse When reasons have to be put forward at all in a question of life, life Itself has become questionable- pg.104

“When reasons have to be put forward at all in a question of life, life itself has become questionable.” this part of the passage alone looms like a titan, overshadowing all the sham-kings and their decaying Babylons of modernity. Life-real vital PRIMAL life, exists fundamentally distinct from reason. Reason at its best is a tool that aids life, but when it subsumes it and asserts its own self consistency over the rising of life, it has come time to view this dichotomy of Vitalism/reason, not as a problem that is in need of compromise- for compromise is the servant of reason- the only way to deal with this dichotomy truly is to treat it as the ultimate question of Either/Or.

[1] Quite literally dysgenic in some cases. High IQ(highly correlated with  consciousnesseses) people actually tend to breed far less often than low IQ people. they are also highly risk averse. It is a beautiful paradox , isn’t it? To be born with such fruitful gifts only to be to paralyzed by said gifts to spread them. The low IQ-man man is completely subsumed to his impulses-for good or ill- and will follow them without hesitation. When he feels horny he does not write out a Telle novella tier romantic fantasy in his mind, nor does he diligently plan out how to properly approach -in the least creepy way possible- his co-worker; The low IQ-man, not possessing even the theory of mind to be paralyzed by self consciousness, just walks up to the Girl he thinks has the nicest ass and asks if she’s down to fuck.