> Anne, then, what do you think energy is? Is it something which can be defined? Something like an Idea (in a platonic sense)?
> then, does ‘energy’ here mean something like an infinite flow? if then, is there any possibility of it being related to the will of a Being which is over the reach of human beings?

So you ask if the Idea in a Platonic sense would be some sort of energy. And the same with the will of a Being (I guess you mean in a more religious sense). But I think both are not the energy/matter part of the model.

The energy/matter part is what can be measured by scientists. Energy is just that one part of Einstein’s formula E=mc2, all matter is actually energy.

And I think Plato’s Ideas and a Being, have to do with the other part of the model, psyche/language as Carteret calls it (metaphysical).

But psyche/language is to limited in my opinion. Psyche indicates something rather personal, and I think it is much more general. That part includes also the collective unconscious, dreams, myths, religious feelings, oneness and so on.

And language is also concepts, consciousness, art and so on.

Something like: giving words to feelings. Where words is: language-concepts-consiousness-art. And where feelings is: psyche-religion-dreams-myths.

But both are even more then that. I think it is also is what David Bohm is talking about when he says that the electron has a mindlike quality that responds to information (to put form in).

> then, where do you think that ‘bodily movement’ should belong to?

Bodily movement is such an example of the couple energy/matter that responds to the other couple psyche/language (which is then a much broader concept).

I really have to try to make it more clear, but I hope this was a start.

But I guess it is also because of what you said ‘things that cannot be defined, but of which we do want to make sense’.

And I really do want to make sense of it. So I read it again myself, for the gazillionth time. And in doing so now, I thought I could use other words in the text, words that I, for myself, already used, but did not change in the text, because I wanted to stay as closely to the original as possible.

But now I updated the post, and systematically changed the 4 most important words [action, condition, infinity, limitation] into [active, passive, potential, structure].

Action = ACTIVE
Condition = PASSIVE
Infinity = POTENTIAL
Limitation = STRUCTURE

In my next comment I want to try and answer your questions. They very much made me think, and I first have to find out how I see those things. But as soon as I have a better understanding myself, I will try to answer them.

Thanks for helping me to define it all better,
Annemieke

But instantly the post started providing a link to the ‘basic concept’, therby leading me to that post. When I found the mechanism woven in your blog, I thought that maybe the big titles given on the top of your blog may be the ones which you Anne, might want to speak about first with the most emphasis.

Therefore, I clicked on ‘core’ and eventually found myself re-encountering this post on Carteret. As you know, if you still remember, I was interested in this French figure and once read through this post earlier. So I’ll give you some comments on this informative post below: (it might be a little long)

1. on the notion
‘matter and psyche are sort of the same, but matter is also energy.’
> Anne, then, what do you think energy is? Is it something which can be defined? Something like an Idea(in a platonic sense)?

2. on the notion
‘the energy in the matter can be seen as workable infinity, an infinity in action. And matter is a condition of limitation’
> then, does ‘energy’ here mean something like an infinite flow? if then, is there any possibility of it being related to the will of a Being which is over the reach of human beings?

3. on the last 3 paragraphs
‘So on one hand as a physical aspect of the world, there is the couple matter/energy: a condition of limitation and an infinity in action.

And on the other hand, complemantary to that and as a metafysical aspect, there is the couple psyche/language: a condition of infinity and a limitation that can work on that actively.

The result of that, if maximum, is poetry and if this does not work then there is the language that totaly drawns in the actual unspeakable of the psyche, which gives the mystical.”’

> then, where do you think that ‘bodily movement’ should belong to? matter, or infinity(limitation)?

Final comment:
This post is very interesting, especially in that it talks about something which is more than particular human language(in Saussurian, the langue).
In other words, it deals something beyond, and at the same time adoptable. It’s almost identical to the concept of ‘game theory’ of Ludwig Wittgenstein, when concentrating on the aspect just I’ve mentioned, that,
‘there are things which we cannot define, but use them and make sense of them.’

Well, some pretty messy questions.
Feel free to answer them taking your time.

FESTINA LENTE
Ighim