"There is nothing much you can do about
the circumstances
of
your life.
One thing that you have absolute control over in
your life
is the context for
your life.
We have almost no awareness of context."
...
"There is no such thing as consciousness, there is only conscious of."
It was some time around now (it may have been earlier today or it may
have been
ten years
ago or it may have been during
the last weekend of August
1978,
but nonetheless it was sometime around NOW). We were
participatingwith Werner
in an event he was
leading.
He had introduced us to ie made us cognizant of "context" and its point
/ counter-point "content". I had three go-to ways with
which
I interpreted
context ie I had three ways of conceiving it.
Primitively (somewhat simplistically) I had it that context was kind of
like a container,
a box
(if you will), and content was whatever was in
that box.
That's actually not a bad way to look at it. Context: container;
content: what's contained; context:
box;
content: all the stuff in
the box.
That was my first take on it. It was just
an analogy
but it fit well. I consider that entry-level context, a
working basis
(a platform
if you will) for fuller, mature distinctions to come.
After I grew up a bit, I started getting a second glimpse of what the
distinction "context" and its point / counter-point "content" may
possibly shed light on. Context is like
the screen
on which the movie (content) is projected. In this glimpse, it's who
we really are. Context: because of it, we can have experiences ie
because of it, we experience; content: what we experience; context:
the screen;
content:
the movie.
Entry-level context is now who we really are as the photographic plate (if you
will) for our experiences; entry-level content is now
the movie
on the screen - to deploy two equally effective and valid analogies.
And then later on with
Wernerobserving
and expanding on what context / content might be, I came across / was
inspired by
listening
him distinguish yet a third possible deployment of context, a
behavioral context (if you will). In this form, context is
that which colors our experience, which will subconsciously influence
our behavior. Its components can be things such as worldview,
interpretations,
opinions
etc which we unknowingly / unwittingly created. Context: coloring;
content: what we do ie our behavior as its colored by the context in
which we do whatever it is that we do. I
consider
that behavioral context.
Here's an example you may be able to relate to. Your boyfriend breaks
up with you. It's the culmination of a messy
relationship
in which you were taken advantage of, treated unfairly, hurt, dismayed
etc. From then on, you lived in a context you unwittingly and
unknowingly created, a context which casts all men as unfair and
hurtful, even those whom you don't know, even those you haven't met,
and you don't know that you don't know that you're living
inside of that context in which all men are pre-cast as unfair and
hurtful. That's behavioral context. I also
consider
that
epistemological
context ie fully mature context. It's the hardest of the three go-to
ways of looking at context to distinguish because to get it, you must
catch yourself
as you're being colored by it.
In a
graduate
conversation like this one, we're aware of
the circumstances
of
our lives.
Yet
we have almost no awareness
of (the) context
in which we hold them, or
the way
it colors our experience even though it's we who
unknowingly / unwittingly created it. And while there's not much we can
do about
the circumstances
in
our lives,
we can create the context in which they
show up.
Whether you create a context which colors all men as taking advantage
of you, treating you unfairly, hurting you, dismaying you etc, or
whether you create a context which colors all men as
wonderful is entirely up to you. Really.
