After intuition, aesthetics: partly objective, partly not, partly innate, partly not, partly unchangeable, partly not, partly unrefinable, partly not, partly unknown and unknowable, partly not, partly true and always true, partly not; aesthetics which is both the vehicle and bridge that transmits and transmutes the impulses and instincts originating in the objective domain in the subjective “reality” of ‘what is’ via the senses which not only perceive environmental and internal stimuli according to the aesthetic framework innate to the individual man but are also continually influenced by that framework during the senses’ transmission of their empirical data and the emotions evoked by such data to the intellect to be used, presumably, for later reflection; aesthetics which, again, unique to the individual man, are the window into and the vantage of the objective domain and therefore provide the intimations of that domain and also predetermine – at least at the onset – how the senses will initially apprehend the intuitions; aesthetic apprehension which, insofar as it resides momentarily in the senses, can be effected, disciplined, tempered, enflamed, and refined – as all of man’s sensual capacities – by the discipline, severity, restriction, hardness, and rigor imposed upon it by the individual human will through physical action and mental activity, or, of course, its lack and opposite, the presence or absence of such a will that will greatly influence the manner in which one perceives the present, interpretates the past and, consequently, foresees a future world that in some way may objectively be, and also what man through and by his aesthetics might make it to be, the harder, harsher, more disciplined, and refined one’s senses, which is to say, the more one is physically and mentally fit and discerning to recognize sentimentality and easy emotionalism which forever appeals not to the highest in man but the lowest, most bestial, and crude, the more his own inescapable personal bias will resemble the “truth” or objective domain, should any truth be found therein at all.
To authentically envision the future as well as communicate it in a compelling enough way such that the future actually comes to resemble the art of the visionary’s work is indeed the mark of a supreme genius whose aesthetic instincts and the manner in which they are tempered bestow near-universal credibility to all the things he says, feels, and does, never mind how asinine, foolish, naive, ridiculous, or offensive his various whimsies and aphorisms may seem before they come to pass.
Insofar as the gut is indeed the seat of intuition and the nexus of the instincts, man, if he so desires to develop his intuitions and instincts so as to trust them more faithfully in light of all the prevailing contradictions that physically, socially, and mentally surround and assault him, would do best to periodically free his stomach from the incessant burdens of digestion and elimination of food by engaging in the art and practice of fasting and abstinence from certain debilitating types of food and drink that cloud and interrupt both mind and spirit, which, parenthetically, is virtually every conceivable food that might be consumed today, barring minor exception.
To “artistically” render a possible future is, of course, best achieved not by rendering such a possibility in a direct or actual way but primarily through nuance, insinuation, suggestion, and, most commonly, the meticulous distillment of the great man’s entire corpus whose various models, if accurately applied upon the past and relevant to the present, will inevitably apply to the future as well and can thus be used as a navigational apparatus for moving forward into that future.
The supreme test of the visionary who has been enraptured by a particular image of the future is to faithfully maintain the integrity and eventuality of that vision against self-doubt, self-hatred, the trembling of confidence and faithlessness that are aroused in manifold ways by both the world and the visionary himself, his vision which, if indeed grand, powerful, awesome, profound and true enough, will most likely unfold long after his death while his life in the body will only witness contradiction and refutations of the vision, accompanied by the overwhelming social and cultural pressure of its opposite whose unbreakable future inevitability will be everywhere proclaimed and preached by the smart, “accomplished”, erudite, and good (to include the masses who follow such individuals).
Passing this ultimate test unto death, though dead, such a one will rightly be crowned by history and by time with the honor “genius”.
Devil walks into bar. Orders drink. Asks Philosopher sitting next to him: “And what do you do?”