To anyone who’s seen Twin Peaks, I recommend Mark Frost’s book The Secret History of Twin Peaks, written in the run-up to the later series, The Return. It’s a great backstory on how the town’s darkness came about, even if David Lynch didn’t see the town’s background quite the same way. The podcast Tanis is another intriguing story set in the Pacific Northwest - the creator Terry Miles says Twin Peaks influenced him, and it really shows.
“That’s how you live? That’s what makes it fine to live — art?” she said in audible disbelief. “But why is there an experience of the sublime at all? Why do you feel a wonder? . . . You experienced transcendence, you've experienced the sublime. Does that not indicate to you that there's something outside of yourself?”
Audrey's first question is perfectly reasonable. Yes, that's what makes it fine to live: art, science, philosophy, love, solidarity, the National Parks -- much more, in fact, than any single human can experience. But the rest of her comment, not so much. Why is there an experience of the sublime? This is a question for psychology or physiology or evolutionary biology, but that's not what Audrey's asking. She's asking ... what? What is the metaphysical ground of the sublime? I'd say there isn't one, and Audrey can't prove there is simply by pointing to the sublime and saying "the sublime exists, so it must have a metaphysical ground." That's a wholly circular proof.
Of course there's something outside oneself, namely, art, science, philosophy, etc. It's entirely possible to say yes to transcendence and no to metaphysics.
To anyone who’s seen Twin Peaks, I recommend Mark Frost’s book The Secret History of Twin Peaks, written in the run-up to the later series, The Return. It’s a great backstory on how the town’s darkness came about, even if David Lynch didn’t see the town’s background quite the same way. The podcast Tanis is another intriguing story set in the Pacific Northwest - the creator Terry Miles says Twin Peaks influenced him, and it really shows.
RIP David Lynch.
“That’s how you live? That’s what makes it fine to live — art?” she said in audible disbelief. “But why is there an experience of the sublime at all? Why do you feel a wonder? . . . You experienced transcendence, you've experienced the sublime. Does that not indicate to you that there's something outside of yourself?”
Audrey's first question is perfectly reasonable. Yes, that's what makes it fine to live: art, science, philosophy, love, solidarity, the National Parks -- much more, in fact, than any single human can experience. But the rest of her comment, not so much. Why is there an experience of the sublime? This is a question for psychology or physiology or evolutionary biology, but that's not what Audrey's asking. She's asking ... what? What is the metaphysical ground of the sublime? I'd say there isn't one, and Audrey can't prove there is simply by pointing to the sublime and saying "the sublime exists, so it must have a metaphysical ground." That's a wholly circular proof.
Of course there's something outside oneself, namely, art, science, philosophy, etc. It's entirely possible to say yes to transcendence and no to metaphysics.