Page 36 - alys&pavle 2021

to complete the blue triptych with a same same but different, hereʼs a question: why can a human person feel a tendency? why are we drawn? what is there, in other words, before cognition and how does it inform oneʼs process?
is it possible to, in that time before cognition, make a distinction between being informed and being conditioned? because of course, you want your tendencies to be suggestive, not dominant, right? you do not (!) want your tendencies to make decisions for you...? or am I being foolish thinking that it is possible to regard what conditions us agentially?
hypothesis: what conditions us is knowledgeable. but because knowledge is, in this case, pre-cognitive: coming into dialogue with it, activating itʼs agential intra-active potential isnʼt as straightforward an activity as reason would require it to be for the process
of intentionally engaging with the pre-cognitive— knowledgeable to be perceived, in itself, as a reasonable endeavor. a reasonable inquiry.
a statement disguised as a question: what if reason is the volatile part of the equation above, instead of the volatile always already being pre-cognitive (embodied!) knowledge? what if reason is (already!) a dynamic, a context-sensitive dynamic, instead of it being the assumed objective-anchored non-negotiable standard?
would then critical thinking have an easier time being recognized as action instead of it being understood as
a necessarily observational technology? (observation in this context is understood as opposite of action: a superficial, aesthetic endeavor. central for some, marginal for others—because it is measured against that historical reasonable objective-anchored standard of power.)