Subjectivity of Quality

by superambitioussoup

(Note about try number 2: 😦 So, I was also thinking along the same lines as Alfred and wanted to try my ice breaker game on my dormmates. Unfortunately, given how over the year, house meeting has turned into more of a get some free food and leave, I didn’t even get to explain my game this last Thursday…maybe I should have probably work more on publicity…or be more assertive next time…or not stuff my face with Chipotle…and with that, let’s talk about the reading)

What really got me was Nachmanovitch’s idea of resonance. I could never really explain why I sometimes would feel strongly about some art piece or some word at some moment in time, but “resonance with an inner truth” seems to hit it spot on. We can recognize quality because quality resonates with us.

Then I was thinking about subjectivity. Something which I believe to be quality might be junk in say…Saif’s eyes, but I think Nachmanovitch sort of brings this up with ambiguity. He goes on to describe how being true to oneself helps us get closer to a “collective consciousness.” Now is this collective the “human” collective (human as opposed to animals and plants)? If so, then this suggests there is a common ideal of what is quality, thus going against the subjective idea that I had of quality. In the same paragraph though, he mentions resonance with an “inner” truth which suggests a more subjective ideal of quality….not sure what to make of it…thoughts anyone…