Polarities 1: Intuition & Intellect

 

I’ve been contemplating this little nugget from Nietzsche: “Ultimately, no one can extract from things, books included, more than he already knows. What one has no access to through experience one has no ear for.”

I have always based enormous value on my intellect. As a child in a chaotic home, my ability to reason, analyse, and structure my mind was of utmost importance. Fortunately, this way of being is one that our culture celebrates and rewards, in fact demands. Suffice to say, good grades abounded, certificates were granted, academic success was guaranteed.

I now place enormous value on my intuition. As an adult in a chaotic world, my ability to imagine, create, and let go of mental structures is of utmost importance. Unfortunately, this way of being is one that our culture denigrates and dismisses, in fact fears.  Suffice to say, arguments abound, points are rejected, social success is not guaranteed.

When I say I know something intuitively, this is often argued against as being merely based upon feelings. Well, let’s analyse this (good old left-brain working pretty damn well still)… Call me a swot (please, I really don’t mind), but whenever a word is troubling me I look up the etymology to see what ancient wisdom we might have lost, and Oh what a truly marvellous example this is; mere, from the Latin merus, meaning ‘undiluted’, which in late middle English becomes ‘pure’ or ‘downright’.

Ha! Take that ye dismissers – my merely intuitive knowledge is undiluted and pure! Okay okay, let’s calm down for a second. Undiluted? This is interesting. As opposed to what? Can we posit a polarity (always a fun game)? Is there primary and secondary knowledge? And is the former the undiluted mode and the latter diluted? And what is Nietzsche on about? (I love Nietzsche by the way, despite his contempt for those of us with merely X chromosomes – see what I did there?) You can dismiss him if you like, on the basis of a) insanity b) being dead c) oft quoted within Nazi propaganda (however, you should do your own research before passively accepting any of these, except b) - he is quite dead). Where were we? Honestly, the ubiquity of brackets is becoming rather Beauvoir-esque (though it was the repetitive semi-colon she was guilty of; semi-colonic irritation. See what I did there?)

Nietzsche was a musical prodigy as well as a man of phenomenal linguistic intelligence, so to return to our quote – is he proposing the same argument about ‘knowledge’ that is oft heard about artistic ability? That it inheres in a person from birth? I balk a little at this notion because I passionately believe in the fundamental necessity of practice. I don’t really care what sphere we’re discussing; practice is the branch from which spontaneity blooms.

I have always felt that intuition is the conscious performance of unconscious rehearsal, that there is much going on behind the scenes and when the mind is ready, a gloriously flamboyant idea flounces onto the stage in true diva fashion with an inevitability – DARLINGS, I’VE ARRIVED – that pays absolutely no homage whatsoever to the director and producers who have made the entrance possible. 

However, there are moments when this is not true, when I access something unexperienced yet self-evident, when I chance upon something new and recognize it as something I knew. And no, I don’t want to give you an example. I am only going to say that the hierarchy we have created that places intellect above intuition is a social construction, and I am increasingly wary of those as we stray further and further from home. And no, I am not going to attempt to explain that. I am simply a cow smelling imminent rain and I will sit down. I will not tell you how I know it will rain, and I will not care whether it rains or not. I will not try to persuade you that it is about to rain and I will not care how earnestly you attempt to dissuade me from sitting down. I will simply invite you to intuit the rain yourself and trust in your own ability to do so. Good luck.