Radhika asks if one can be liminal, really, ever – “in any context.”
If time is, then existence is pertually liminal, always becoming, what Enoch called “the dissident now.”
Now is described as “dissident” to emphasis the notion of existence continually coming into being (in a quantum mode, and/or in keeping with ancient mystical epistemologies) against popular “commonsense” linear conceptions of temporality.
The problematic, then, may not be where/when, but rather how. (Ah, cyberdiva is ahead of me on this, too!) 🙂 “…wondering how “how” figures into all this…”
“How” is the relation to context…
If now is always becoming then context does not preexist. No determinism whatsoever. Context is itself a relation, is (co?)constructed by the relation rather than providing limits of contingency for a relation.
If it ain’t discourse, it’s dialectic (follow up on this link)! Hmm, note the archaic definition of discourse: The process or power of reasoning. Here’s another definition arguing that use of the term, “discourse”, presumes an intellectual component is involved in the interaction.
Too many tangents! I wanted to note the different applications (epistemologies?) of the term, relation:
binary. I can’t even do this now (!), but here’s more on binary relations which might hint at the difference between “number” (ref. Pythagoras) and “mathematics” that Enoch mentioned….(maybe).
This online poetry journal, Voice in the Wilderness: art and the shame of being human, looks hot.