Thinking Contextually Part 2
How acknowledging the limitations of thought can help use it more effectively
In the last post I suggested that one common pitfall in analysis is to assume that analysis arrives at neutral conclusions, and that instead we should remain aware of the ways in which thinking is always also a doing. (Read more here: https://recontextualize.substack.com/p/thinking-contextually-part-1)
The second element I suggest we should remain attentive to if we want to think in a way that respects the larger contexts that are always at play in our analysis is to remain aware of the constricting nature of thought, the way in which thought always isolates one domain from a much larger context. Any particular phenomena, no matter how seemingly simple or inconsequential, arises as a consequence of the meeting of a nearly infinite amount of causes and conditions. If I wanted to analyze the simple act of drinking tea, for example, I could analyze the agricultural practices through which the tea was grown, the natural processes that cause the tea plant to grow, the ethical status working conditions that I am implicitly supporting by buying the tea, the economic background of the price of the tea, and the cultural significance of drinking tea. The list could go on; as Zen master Thich Nhat Hanh says, the simple act of drinking tea contains the entire universe. But contrary to what many philosophers seem to believe, thought cannot contain the entire universe; thought must artificially isolate one of those domains and try to say something meaningful and useful about it.
Keep reading with a 7-day free trial
Subscribe to recontextualize to keep reading this post and get 7 days of free access to the full post archives.