August 31, 2026

1 Sensory perception is a wanting, a suspicion; it deals with what we want to happen and with what we don’t want to happen; lying, fantasy, imagination are bound up with this too; rational perception deals with duty and verification?

Now, if dreams are conceived along with waking life, desires too?, then, as Jünger says, there are transitions between these two perceptions, or do we never find them separately? Jünger even speaks of centaurs and sphinxes as images full of credibility.

2 The strange thing is this: the senses do not lie, so how can sensory perception be imaginative and fanciful?

Perhaps it would be worth stressing the capacity, the instruments through which that capacity develops, seeing the eyes as the instruments of sensory perception?

3 Even today we have to «think», to pause, in order to remember where the sun rises, or whether the earth revolves around the sun or the other way around, even though we know it is the earth that revolves around the sun; the same thing happens when we say the sun came up or went down, we have the impression that in everyday life there is no need to say, for instance, that we, with the earth, face the sun at dawn and turn our backs to it at dusk

Now, could the same thing be happening when we try to separate sensory perception from rational perception?

And earlier in the same text he says:

4 Unsuspected Things, sensory perception suspects them; rational perception, the verification of those suspicions or their refutation, has little to do with the origin of that sensory perception and the unsuspected that is thus imagined, although verification is part of its stamping on the wall of time, rather it closes it off, because it is «barred from access to the origin»¹.

Sensory perception, like desire, «can be insidious»², and it can also complicate things; what rational perception contributes is simplicity, the capacity to close off the unsuspected, previously grasped by sensory perception, in images; sensory perception can turn grotesque just as rational perception can.

It isn’t only engraving that leaves its mark; painting does too. That is, the insidious is not only in the closing off (verification); it is also in the fertility of images. Still, there is no complete separation between sensory perception and rational perception.

5 The timeless breaks the temporal; things “outside” wear out faster than those «inside». «Inside, everything is done»³. By the time the modern, the new (today technique and technology), have to bear the weight, we realize far too late the damage we did to them by being more timeless.

The timeless breaks the timeless, the body too; it does so through negligence, through neglect, and so later it is surprised by how ruined the temporal is, and whatever is subject to time, and it does so too late.

Here an opportunity appears, the opportunity to live fully; it becomes clear to what extent we have lived in vain, or at least it becomes clear that we have lived in vain.

6 What does it say that the timeless does not want to care for the temporal, something that seems natural and healthy?: it is a hopeless case; even people who have not yet accepted «the course of doubtful or impossible success» are problematic, «they do not know how to do without their own position, they take it too seriously».

7 In silence people go on screaming without knowing it: “I’m dying.” How have they still not accepted it? That does not make death any less unsettling, but accepting it yields great returns, above all a healthy selfishness that thinks of everyone.