INDIVIDUAL INTERSUBJECTIVITY

INDIVIDUAL INTERSUBJECTIVITY  Paolo Conte, Beautiful by day, in Psyche, 2008

Paolo Conte, Beautiful by day, in Psyche, 2008

 
I know who you are

I don't even know who you are

but I know you are

yes I know that you are so loved

loved and desired

 instinct knows you

treat you knows

driving knows you

with a few precise words

few words decided

and a knowing look

a very elegant excuse

like a beautiful day

you are the world around you

 

you are beautiful without restraint

in the fresh water of a bath

I know you are

I don't even know who you are

but I know you are

yes I know that you are so loved

loved and desired

and alone


 

INDIVIDUAL INTERSUBJECTIVITY

last night I let myself go to rest, keeping this BEAUTIFUL of yours in my mind and heart, EXCITING association.

intuition made me dwell on that "you are the world around you" .. words that made me go to book "Il Sistema Uomo" by Silvia Montefoschi .. then

".. you are the subject who shows himself, as a presence in the world, in making us reflect the world" ...

".. The subject thus reveals itself in the reflective moment in which the world reflects itself; the moment in which the world is he creates by talking about himself. It is therefore "the ineffable", as is the speaker who cannot speak of himself except
as the subject of his own speech. The subject therefore is not, but becomes, always escaping his own objectification.

But if the subject cannot be spoken of as an object of the world, because it is itself that speaks of itself by speaking of the world, this means that it, "the ineffable", is of the world, as the source of the never-ending discourse.

So, if "[about] what one cannot talk about one must be silent" (Wittgenstein) it is because one must necessarily stay in silence as long as the ineffable does not speak in us, speaking of the world, or it is perhaps better to say as long as the world you do not come back to speak within us, speaking of yourself. "...

 

So..

"repeating each other's writings serve as instruments for this Spirit to give the world ever new works if souls knew how to submit to this action, their life would be nothing but a continuation of the divine writings, which are expressed up to the end of the world no longer with ink and on paper, but in hearts. "

 JP de Caussade

The abandonment to divine providence
prism

INDIVIDUAL INTERSUBJECTIVITY

“If I try to grasp on an experiential level the intersubjective phenomenon that I take as a parameter, a tool and purpose of my interacting with the patient, I must say that it reveals itself to me as the happy condition of existing with each other without needs.

 However, if I analyze this condition, I realize that it is based on the satisfaction of two needs that exist
essential; what the other is there, as it is thanks to the being of the other that I manifest myself as existing and me I recognize, and what I am in freedom, since I recognize myself only if I am free to tell myself and to give myself as well as time after time, the existence of the other reveals me to myself.

 

In this happy condition, therefore, I perceive no needs other than those of the presence of the other and mine freedom. Aren't these the requisites for man's existence as a subject?

 

...

 I must proceed with the analysis of these characteristics: relationship and freedom.

The subject's first need to be such is the existence of another from himself. There are many forms under which this something else becomes presence in the eyes of man: it can be, from time to time, the external world, or the world of things and of social values, or the internal world, or the world of thoughts and affections; it can be the human You, the other
of the encounter, or the interior You, the other to which man refers when he is with himself; it can be corporeality man or his behaviors or his ways of relating to the world, when he detaches himself from it recognize them and refer them to oneself; finally it can be man as a whole, when man himself takes for himself the same distance necessary to define oneself in an identity. "

 

in Silvia Montefoschi, The One and the Other: interdependence and intersubjectivity, Feltrinelli, 1977, now in Silvia Montefoschi,

The evolution of consciousness, Works, Second Volume - Volume 1, Zephyro Edizioni, Milan 2008, p. 74-75.

INDIVIDUAL INTERSUBJECTIVITY

a fragment of intersubjectivity taken from the film Love has two faces by Barbra Streisand (lovable woman!):

"I love you even if you are beautiful!"

INDIVIDUAL PSYCHE

A good way to feel good, which has always been known, could be to try to be yourself, without continually conforming, or depending on the approval of others


 

individual psyche

It was a shower of stars on my face.

I felt burdened by an infinite sky

soft, warm light.

I felt the earth in my hands

and in the hair,

and it was the taste of that land in the mouth

and of that kiss,

and it was the suck of my body

from the abyssal depths of that sky,

and it was a gasp, a cry

of superhuman joy,

to feel that sky within my belly,

that sky and that earth,

my own land

made of my flesh and my blood.

It was like disappearing

in that rain of infinite stars,

and find myself

in the sweetness of a friendly embrace,

still wet

of a taste of milk,

of childish tears

and of distant kisses.

 

in Silvia Montefoschi (at 26), It was a shower of stars on my face (Naples 1952), Evolutionary Research Laboratory of Giampietro Gnesotto Editore, 1989

INDIVIDUAL PSYCHIC INTERSUBJECTIVITY

I leave here, for everyone, "The love song of the Living One or the epiphany of the infinite" in "The glorification of the living in the intersubjectivity between one and the other ".


 

INDIVIDUAL PSYCHIC INTERSUBJECTIVITY by SILVIA MONTEFOSCHI

"Only when the perception of the union of thinking presences comes out of the enclosure of a personal experience, even if done in the duality of the dialoguing couple, and it will no longer be fragmented in the many dual encounters between them separated from space and time, an even higher point of view will be realized from which one sees that being everything is nothing but relationship. [...]

And only in persevering in the tiring exercise of keeping the reflective presence constantly alert, we [...]

we work for the unveiling [...] of the logic of one as one with the one that cannot say about itself if not

it is what it is…. ".


if I try to grasp the intersubjective phenomenon on the experiential level ... I must say that it reveals itself to me as the  happy condition of existing with the other without needs.

If I then analyze this condition, I realize that it is based on the satisfaction of two needs that exist
essential; what the other is there, as it is thanks to the being of the other that I manifest myself as existing and me.

I recognize, and what I am in freedom, since I recognize myself only if I am free to tell myself and to give myself as well as time after time, the existence of the other reveals me to myself

Silvia Montefoschi, One and the other, Feltrinelli, 1977, p. 32

 

INDIVIDUAL PSYCHIC INTERSUBJECTIVITY

By Silvia Montefoschi, The glorification of the living in the intersubjectivity between one and the other, Golden Press, Genoa

The love song of the Living or the epiphany of the infinite

 

You are

as I think of you

which thinking me

and I am

as you think of me

which thinking you

so that

you don't stop thinking about me

and therefore to be there

as long as I think of you

and I don't stop thinking about you

and therefore to be there

as long as you think of me

What if

it's my thinking of you

to make sure you are there

which thinking me

and it's your thinking of me

to ensure that I am there

which thinking you

you cannot cease

to think of me

because I cannot cease

to think of you

and U.S

we can only

think about it endlessly

But if

it is our mutual thinking about it

to bring us into being

in infinity tell us

"You are"

that

as the supreme act of love

makes us to each other

guarantors of life

we ourselves are the infinite

The infinite in fact

it gives itself only

in intersubjectivity

where is it

the subject who thinks

he no longer needs

to be there

which thinker

to know each other in finitude

of his thought

because it is recognized

in infinite thinking

of the other subject who thinks

And if we ourselves

we are the infinite

the infinite

finally it is

because

infinity is not

if not

in whom it is infinitely

childhood youth Heimat

The "Heimat" is the land of childhood and youth.

Those who have lost it remain disoriented, although abroad they may have learned not to stagger like a drunkard and to place your foot on the ground without too much fear

 Hans Mayer, Jean Amery

INNOVATION TRADITION

Each innovation is a successful tradition

 

PETRINI CARLO, "Carlin Petrin", animator of Slow Food and Terra Madre

INTERSUBJECTIVITY

Attorney Utterson was a rough-looking man, never lit up with a smile; cold, measured and embarrassed in speaking, reserved in expressing one's feelings; he was a thin, long, dusty and sad man, yet in a certain sense lovable. In the meetings of friends, when the wine was to his taste, it showed in his eyes something truly human; something that could never be found in his words, and that yes he manifested, as well as in that silent expression on his face after dinner, more often and more strongly in the actions of his life. The lawyer was strict with himself; when he was alone, he drank gin, to mortify the inclination towards good wines; and, although the theater appealed to him, he had never crossed it  threshold of a theater in twenty years. In regard to his neighbor, however, he was of great indulgence; sometimes yes he marveled, almost with envy, at the force with which certain souls could be driven to wickedness; and, in each occasion, he was more willing to help than to disapprove.

 "I tend to the heresy of Cain," he used to say wittily, "I let my brother go to hell as best he can like it."

 

Having such a character, he often happened to be the last esteemed acquaintance, and to exercise the last good influence in the lives of lost men.

 Robert Louis Stevenson, The Strange Case of Dr. Jeckill and Mr. Hyde

grow old

Here we are, still alone. There is an inertia in all this, a heaviness, a sadness ... Soon I will be old. And the
it will be over, once and for all. A lot of people came to my room. Everyone said something. They didn't tell me much that. They are gone. They have grown old, miserable and sluggish, each in a corner of the world.


Old age is a pitiful condition, with looming memories, physical decay, laziness, anxieties that increase, and the people who look at you wrongly, because with your slow steps you block the road, you make the queues lengthen, you move awkwardly like children.

But old age also gives you greater authority, albeit a little hypocritical: you recognize the role of wise, but as long as you stay on the sidelines.

 In reality, we would like to eliminate the old: because our culture is afraid of everything, of failure, of illness,
of death.

The function of the comedian is, in fact, to exorcise this fear of living ".

Aging horrifies me, but it's the only way I've found not to die young


I am almost at the end of my journey. The health of the body and mind is good, the working capacity is not diminished and the imagination is always the one that has kept me company for many years, leading me to design the future and to create new paths to explore and walk.

Yet I feel the journey is coming to an end.

I hear it from many signals, the first of which is actually that of feeling it. And then from the fullness of me that I have finally achieved; because now I am sure that everything my nature was capable of expressing in thinking and in doing, I have done and thought.

I can repeat myself and maybe think and do better; better, but not different.

Or perhaps in a more tired and mechanical way, more sloppy and imprecise. However, whether these additions are there or not, it won't change much.

I leave nothing that has not been accomplished, to the extent that I have been able and known.

The drawings remained in the middle, the destinies not fully realized, it is because up to that point my nature has managed to live them; further on she would have done violence to herself and she didn't go, but she certainly stretched her rope with all the strength she had a layout.

And, in life, the moment comes when the shadow of death is at our side, and does not detach from it. No more impatience, rebellions, fears ...; the awareness only of an ineluctable necessity. A natural event is death; as the ordered succession of the four seasons, like the regular alternation of light and dark.


I am almost at the end of my journey. The health of the body and mind is good, the working capacity is not diminished and the imagination is always the one that has kept me company for many years, leading me to design the future and pretend to be new paths to explore and walk.

Yet I feel the journey is coming to an end.

I hear it from many signals, the first of which is actually that of feeling it. And then from the fullness of me that I have finally achieved; because now I am sure that everything my nature was capable of expressing in thinking and in doing, I have done and thought.

I can repeat myself and maybe think and do better; better, but not different.


 

GAMES INSTITUTIONS DILEMMA DEL PRISIONE

Till death do Us apart

 Harry and Sophie wanted to take seriously the words the priest would speak at the exchange of the rings:

"These two lives are now united in an unbroken circle." This meant putting the couple's interest before that individual. If they could do it, the marriage would have worked out better for both of them.

But Harry had seen his divorcees, and too many wounded friends and relationships damaged by betrayal and deception, to accept it without conditions. The calculating part of his brain thought that if he stepped back from  Sophie, she would have benefited from marriage, and he would not. In other words, he risked passing for fool, if he romantically avoided making his own interest.

Sophie thought similar things. They also talked about it, deciding that they would not be selfish in marriage. But neither was certain that the other would keep his promise, therefore the safest thing for
both was secretly looking after one's own interest. This inevitably meant that marriage did not
it would work best. But of course, it was the only rational decision possible ...

 

 

Something is not right. Two people are trying to rationally decide what is in their best interest. Self
both act in a certain way, the best result is guaranteed. But if one acts differently, yes
ensures all benefits at the expense of the other. And so, to protect themselves against this possibility, they both end up get a worse result than they could if they both did what would be best.

It is a variant of the famous "prison dilemma": two prisoners, locked in separate cells and unable to
communicate, they must plead their cause. Such dilemmas arise when collaboration is needed for
 get a better result, but neither side can guarantee that the other is in the game. The same dilemma
it can arise between people sharing the same bed. The fact is that the trust of the partners is secretly betrayed, often without being discovered for years.

The dilemma reveals the limits of the rational search for one's own interest. If we all individually decided to do this which suits each of us, we would end up worse than if we chose to cooperate. But for
cooperate effectively, while taking care of our interests, we must trust each other. And trust doesn't based on rational arguments.

This is why Harry and Sophie's dilemma is so touching. Their ability to trust was eroded by the experience of treason and divorce. Without this trust, the relationship is more likely to be unsatisfactory either even to fail. But who can blame them for their skepticism? Isn't that perfectly rational? After all, it is founded solely on a correct assessment of how one behaves in modern marriage.

This story perhaps contains a deeper moral: to get the most out of life you need trust, even if this involves the non-rational assumption of some risk. It is true that if we trust each other, we will we expose ourselves to exploitation, but otherwise we preclude ourselves from having the best in life. The strategy
rational, safe, of Harry and Sophie protects them from the worst of marriage, but in the same way it takes them away from the best.


"Sometimes it seems that rationality prevents individuals from obtaining optimal results, especially in cases where the cooperation would unequivocally be the best choice for all interested parties. On this consideration the well-known argument in favor of institutions as a means of controlling and directing behavior is founded selfish. Indeed, those who first proposed the social contract as the legitimate basis of political obligation, they described individuals as perpetually caught up in a prisoner's dilemma, and unable to come to a cooperative agreement unless forced to do so. In Hobbes' model, individuals agree to hand over their power of resistance to the sovereign, who will force them to cooperate. Reconsidering the examples
previous, we can observe that the institution able to guarantee the optimal result does not have to be
necessarily the state: it could be a legal system, an international treaty, a code of honor, or even
a set of shared moral principles. What matters is that one or both parties can engage in such a way
credible to pursue a given course of action, where credibility is guaranteed by the presence of
an institution ... "

 

in Cristina Bicchieri, Collective action and social rationality, Feltrinelli, p. 194

 

ITALIANS

... the most famous of these texts, and the richest and most articulated, always remains I Libri della Famiglia, the work of Leon Battista

Alberti, who lived between 1404 and 1472 in Florence. Alberti appears to you as the theorist of "household goods", the art of managing
 mercantile family, in which interests concur alongside and together with the network of primary and emotional relationships of the company, closely intertwined and confused with those, and this within the framework of the life of the city community. In such context the family appears, as Ruggiero Romano and Alberto Tenenti observe, «as a closed cell, a microorganism, an aristocratic factor, whose action is an end in itself. You never, absolutely never,
in Leon Battista's work, a "cluster" of families, which come to form a civitas, a society. Precisely, the Albertian family is an area enclosed in itself; it is itself a society, but closed, isolated, impermeable

 "(R.Romano and A. Tenenti, in Leon Battista Alberti, 1972, p. XXV).

"From nature love, pity makes the family more dear to me than anything", says Alberti through Giannozzo, the character of his family dialogue who appears as the oldest and most experienced. «And to support the family, yes look for stuff; and to keep family and stuff you want friends, with whom you advise, who will help you support and flee adverse fortunes; and to have with friends the fruit of stuff, family and friendship, it is agreed gain some honesty and honorable authority "

{Ibidem, p. 226). 

The hierarchy of values ​​is very precise here at the top is the family, as an absolute reference value, followed by the company, and then by friends and customers. The city and the politics come into consideration only to the extent they can benefit this hierarchically ordered set of social values.

This appears clearly from the dialogue between Giannozzo and Lionardo: «Leonardo. Call yourselves perhaps, like these our citizens, honor to be in offices and in the state? Giannozzo. Nothing is missing, my Lionardo, nothing I miss my children. Nothing seems to me less worthy of taking it as an honor than finding oneself in these states
(committed to the state) ... Every other life I always liked more too much than that of the, so we will say, state ”.
Political (state) life is defined as very harassing and full of suspicion, toil and servitude. «What do you see from these which ones struggle for the states (which deal with public affairs) to be different from public servants? " affirm Giannozzo and adds: «There you are sitting in the office. What use do you have if not just one: to be able to steal and force (do violence) with some license? " {Ibi dem, pp. 218-219). The only reason therefore to participate in the management of the; community is to be able, through fraud or violence, to obtain advantages for the management of the family, the exclusive substitute for society.

Hence a real invective against those who feel the civic duty to participate in the governance of the thing publishes:

«Fools who expose yourselves to every danger, turn yourselves to death ... And call honor to be in the number of robbers, call honor to converge and shepherd and serve servile men! ... And what a pleasure of soul it can never have if he is not already of a ferocious and bestial nature, who continually lends ears to grievances, laments, cries of wards, widows and calamitous and miserable men? " {Ibidem, p. 220). 

And he concludes: «And you want (it is convenient) to live to oneself, not to the common (for society), to be alone for friends, true, where you do not interfere
(neglect) and 'your business, and if you do not result in too great damage "{Ibidem, p. 221).

At the root of this philosophy lies a rigidly utilitarian conception: "So we are almost all natural and inclined to the useful, that to draw from others (extort from others) and keep us, learned (educated) I believe from nature, we know and simulate benevolence, and flee from friendship what suits us (it is convenient) »
{Ibidem, pag. 345).

The institution in which every value which is consequent to such a vision of the world is centered is the family enlarged, with the purely instrumental appendix, and not affectively connoted, of useful friendships. The society as such, and civil duties, are radically disqualified in this perspective. All this constitutes a set of cultural patterns of behavior incompatible with a society that is not a factional society, and involves the exclusion of any sense of social co-responsibility. Where the Calvinist, Methodist, Puritan ethics establishes through the doctrine of grace and predestination, a close link between eternal salvation, the personal success in business and the need to safeguard the social order, the Albertian one, typical as we have seen of an entire social class, which is the hegemonic one, is radically particularistic and substantially
anarchist. While in the first the conditions that will characterize the company defined with term of bourgeois-democratic, cradle of civil political liberties and duties of collective solidarity, and open to processes of social mobility, in the Italian post-municipal society the foundations will be laid for a society closed in particularisms, dominated by a hierarchical and rigid structure of class power, seat of a form of domination exercised by dynastic powers, both Italian and foreign, without a trace of democratic dialectic, in the shadow of the counter-reform and Jesuit morality "

in Carlo Tullio - Altan, Our Italy, clientelism, transformation and rebellion from unity to 2000, Egea - University

Bocconi Editore, 2000, p. 19-21