Skin and the Sceptic; ten golden rules

1)    to desire is to be caught up in the weight of things. Initially to e so caught is to be held between two forces. On the one side there is something beyond, some other individual or series of movements. This other then falls into ones mind, an by actual or occasion, falls into it as a single point: that is as  perception, which bleeds across other images, other memories, other perceptions, to form a messy unity. One reaction of a something, or a sequence of hoops of something’s, to a vivacity, in which all perceptions are caught in their own imprecision  o being about. And yet at the same time one is also define in relation, and as a body to this trapping of another or the wisher of that other in ones own nature. This trapping others, it makes one different, it actively changes ones own reality, ad this change s given at the same time, and through the same sense. One is not then simply caught up in another, one is also forced for define it in terms of the challenge it writes in ones own nature.

2)  More than this, these two are not a all separate. Thy mingle in to senses.  On the one hand the others unity in defined in me in this feeling, or is all two often Another as a whole, as a challenge in perception and in intoxications, lies in my mind and for my mind: I am different, and the rest of me assume this difference, this being pitch otherwise is somehow linked to this thing here. O perhaps stronger, I am different a part has been create in me by this thing, that is quietly recording my sense at this point, and making me so very different.  I or the rest of me, is what start after the reorder. Passions run across a body like the skin , registering the razor-laser effects, of the fact that another has drawn off such a large part in me. But at the same time, the unity of this another is in a sense what finites actually do, and dfrom day on. They create either directly and impression of the themselves in another, which then become real to that other as a cause (as it is another, as it is there to be effect).  Hence to two states of matter, that Spinoza identifies; in definition it is defined in others innivicem-  reciprocally or mutally0: a movement is to be taking up an shaking another. But if on wants to be tied down its singularity it can also be defined in its effect, after that has past, as the movement as it has been in another, as one other has been effected by this moving, that is in causes. We live then in a world where finites are created or felt in others, both directly (that is what they are), and in cause. We live then is a world of skins, skins of affections (each motions naturally criss crosses other, affecting them as it is and so creates skins), or pitches an affect after this skin has been created (on an inside that sees it as causes0. Hence our pattering fo the world in throwing up our own internal skin is no so very un natural

3)  The only problem is that in doing s we cannot or will not do so innocently, of simply. In seeing another, I take two attitudes in relations to what they are. On their side, I will have an attitude about their time: In their will exist to me as a present, and yet the physics of a body and a memory mean that present creates for itself infinite movements. They exist I me, then as I jolt a sequence of movements within my body, as a little loop or semi-stage play, to be called upon, or return to. They exist in the textures of these loops, as these loops, that exist materially in my brain as interrelated, and as interact with them. Thy are recorded the in pressed plateaus of skinny presents, where each element impacts and creates into another. Te sceptic looks on these skins, as sees them for what they are; the conjoining of any elements that are untied not necessarily in the other, but in my lone, in my individuality as a part of my mind, and its ideas; I am then created by skins of thought, and present unites to me, of elements that are possibly diverse.

4)  But at the same time these presents in all their richness, these skins of the present, as they are present to me, as a feeling, as they affect me on the inside with feeling, ill not be simply third. If they are negative, or have elements that are different or problematic, I will strive in their giving not to give the, or only give the bits I want. My being, the sense  then that  take these skin and ingest them into a me, will give then not as simply altogether there and present, but rather, as an impact, and a reaction. I given them all the while in the attempt not to give them, to warp then up or create a resent more powerful, or pull out other elements.

5)   This last point is itself complex, as their giving in me, or better in that skin before me, there is already pain /I am giving them then already is a transition, I am losing what I am in their giving,. The then actively force me into a preset I am trapped in, I am less in. as item what they are then I marginalize this affect pull other times, I revel in other things, I attempt to unpick their present, to make it different, to drive it away. I am then given as a change, in a change (and their present is for me, their slice of skin is to me a s challenging change) a change I then react to and violently as I can counter reaction. To perceive is not then to have skins simply present, I is to strike an attitude as those sins affect, and to stake a posting of those skins, and what follows one fro them One organized them, attempting to break them open, and pull apart the unties creating pain, from the coagulation of everything else. This unity gains a reality, become all the more present, as it presents the thing I need to get rid of. If becomes the primary unit for the past- its motivator; or better it is present now, as that thing which if  throw into the past will increase to be so vivid for me. I is present them only in the need for its own occlusion. It is that thing which I must give in the occluding.

6)  In the case of the positive, the forces are almost the other way around. As something is helping me, I enrich in the giving. T exist then as that which been the positive skin is helping what I am, and continuing to do so  want it, always to be their for me therefore. I give it in me, I know it noting what it is, but rather in the sense of what it is making me become, how it is already challenging me elsewhere. The resent in the skin is initially then merely the sense of that which when given I change positively.  Is the wrap for hat change, the simple name for it. Here it is of course defined in a lack of sort. T=I desire that present to be their for me, and know that it is were not, if this element when, then the changes I am getting for free from it would be plots to me. Its present in my mind (or elements of it) become then vital to what I have become, it becomes here a goal.

7)  And yet at the same time is it of coursed a warning, of as one revels in the slice of this future, then one is stuck wanting this present, and again caught up .the present becomes wrapped up in times element, this one here, one looses sight of the fact that what it does to the mind is something that  actually do for the mind – it is in me not it, it is in my thoughts, my thinking my mind, and o becomes the only possible goal. Worded than that the pleasure it creates within me, it itself a body of its own, a desire within me, I give it in the feeling and thinking, and in the giving strive for it I might strive for it and it apostle within me for the determinant of everything else I might be. I become then caught in the trapped of  trapped present.

8)  The skin of passions, creates in the layers below the impact of the other a whole fissures world, where that other is being pulled into what  am, and digested. I make what I am and how I am being bothered in its light and through what I is and what it will b.  become then so very different through its nature -: More than that I give that nature as a unity as it is to be. I do not give in then is the simply present (which itself is not in the skin, but is rather early a factor of the skin- and affect of their being a poet outside and a gradually filter into the inside: the skin is the plastic boundary, inside which there are thing). I give it then in the way it defects me into time: I give it in the sense that I has or is already changing me. His giving is, as the skin is my layers, and at each point contains things other that unities (which are untied at the next level: I am cold, is a lot of colds, a lot of affects impacting in a bran into give an over all being), So with feelings thy are compound; to hate is to feel pain before, and hope or gratitude after. Each feeling spins across other world. t embodies in mine, be demanding or creating or requiring to be given in a skin of its own; it being its giving demanding a clothing I perceptions, that may or may no relate to its own initial impact, but also include other times; this giving is the wrapped in a feeling, and has its echoes elsewhere. I then see a you, as you tumble past certain level – a see you in joy. That joy, infuses the giving off you, I see you not merely here and not, but as a part of something else, perhaps a scheme. The sight of you, opens my mind to presents to come, to futures, futures that embody across experiences we have had together, and dreams I am making. Or tumble past one layer into me as a thing, then created within me, that passionate skin, where you and I become together and create something together.

9)  At which point the sceptic throws up there arms in horrors and this over ruse of skins above and below. Skins as impact into the body, as the point then  make a unity after, but also hoping in the body where with passion create a new body, a new sense in which this thing is to me, and U am to it (a skin then the rest of me reacts to) They cannot be the same skin, the sceptic insists; or better they are only the same skin as long as one incites on using pleasure and pain as ones categories; these are categories of feeling and texture, and so they aright e same. And yet, for the sceptic one looses something in their reality; one looses the difference between the vividness of reality and that of passions; both are collapsed into an ontology of tense, and skin, of making  something different. one looses then the power of reality to pitch thoughts differently and explore they skins thimbles ad themselves. If one actually wants to think and think adequately, one needs to return to these skins, the sceptic says, n make them other that these unities an their impact. Above that is very possible very creative (it will allow one to re-throw those truths that tumble into on from reality), has desires of its own, and yet so difficult to start…A fact that the sceptical Spinoza also understands as well as Hume.

10)                 More than that Spinoza might insist the power of the skins of the mind, is that if one jump onto a skin, one might suddenly find that on did not start or stop where one thought: one was other than a body. As then, using Hume’s own example, I share organs of mind with you, an we create rality togther, we might togtehr suddenly find we are making more world at the same point and in the same sense. We might then be ble to open intoeach others more. The flshy skin of our bodis, would then catch us up, together, world, through the luminous or felt skins of the passions insist are  part in something else, some other state, one other pigment of being. to place skins inside and out, is to need endlessly to clarify (and Spinoza certainly accepts this – one needs not to belief simply what one is given, the unities, there are always things elements share part or point beyond them); but more importantly, to be in such skins I not to be simply hide the body that manufactures those skin in me. He mechanics of being a body are themselves mess enough that we might together be a part of the same skin the you in me and the me in you, both passionately building a world together; a situation Hume of course expressed so well as morality…..