Familial Ontology I: The Emperor is Naked

“What ARE you in relation to this child?”

This is a question without an answer -- for it suggests an essential fallacy: that there is or could be a THING that one is or can be, "a priori" -- that is to say, that “something” (which can be indicated verbally, by titular language) is in fact not only an approximation of but in fact able to define, name, or make actual a person, relationship or condition.

In this situation, my approach is one that flies in the face of the "a priori": it refuses to be confined or defined by a standard model, title, or explanation that is verbally pre-existent. This is confounding to those who seek a response to the above.

Not surprisingly, this is a situation that reminds us how terrified most people are of letting go of their sense of "knowing" -- logic or 'reality' nonwithstanding. For when a choice or action and/or new model/arrangement is presented or realized, not only are our standard systems but also our ontologies (systems of knowing/meaning) -- and therefore the actions we base on these, as well as the level of consciousness with which we do so (or all too often, don't) -- brought into stark relief.

That is to say:

If there is a valid, if undefined, “other,” – something that refuses “thingyness” in favor of conscious action and intention – it follows that exposure to this (non)thing forces consideration of one’s own definitions/models/sources of meaning. Those brought into contact will have difficulty avoiding the challenge of evaluating these functions within their own systems, seeing them thus in a light which values action and experience over the traditional relational currencies of station, title, lineage or so forth.

Ideally, this exposure frees (rather than freezes) those in radius -- and by extension those exposed secondhand, narratively, etc – but just like other philosophies based on deconstruction (on unlearning, rather than defining) one is left without the comfort of a system of rational knowing, making it necessary to find in oneself an unwritten source of strength, rather than falling victim to the fears this cultural/societal unsettling instinctively causes.

The great beauty, here, however, is that under the fear of no longer “knowing” exists the place of freedom from constrictive, rule-based illusion, and an opportunity to realize our own pathways. Every moment lived without the falsity of a standard known is another in which we can and do define ourselves and our worlds by doing well and kindly, with love as our guide – not doing “right” based on external concepts beyond the self.

I am everything and nothing to this child.
I love this child.
I will intend and act at all moments as best I can with these beliefs as my guide.

2.20.2010