I used to turn my nose up at nuance and complexity; I used to believe there was some inherent superiority in assigning a blanket label to a specific experience, and that delving into it would steal its magic and render it into a dead, logic-bound husk.
Now, however, I see that it’s the exact opposite. As I delve further into nuance, I can’t help but marvel at the maps of causality that rise around all phenomena—from human beauty to quantum physics. I find myself humbled and awed by the infinite unfolding of countless variables—of how myriad implications dance across my perception, hinting that everything I sense is part of some giant game of limitless possibility.
Dirty Sci-Fi Buddha 
Me too
LikeLiked by 1 person
It can be so overwhelming at times, and it sometimes slows things down to a crawl when you have to study those complexities, but I prefer it that way.
LikeLiked by 1 person
It’s definitely an exercise in humility.
LikeLike
When a butterfly is captured, it is no longer a butterfly, but a memory. Tagging,vs. storing leaves experiences out to match any new thoughts.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I think that assertion is a matter of personal preference, which, in my mind, aligns with outer reality through functionality. If it serves me better to think of it as a memory, then fine, but if it serves me better to think of it as a real thing, then that’s fine as well.
LikeLike
when does a “thing” become an idea of a thing?
LikeLiked by 1 person
I think the more important and useful question would be: “which paradigm serves me better—when I think of a thing as an idea, or when I think of it as an instantiated entity?”
LikeLike