At the heart of any analytic or scientific endeavor is logic,
Simple components used to build more complex propositions
which picture a way the world could be.
Any logical statement can be true or false
depending on its validity
and correspondence with the world.
The issue of correspondence, of soundness, will always foreground any application of logic to the world.
Logic can sate that analytic desire for objectivity or universality but this comes at the cost of certainty.
There is a limit to the amount of simultaneous precision one can impose upon the world.
Regardless of whether it is in the spatial, temporal, or cognitive domain, the nature of focus is exclusionary.
One cannot know with exactitude, both position and momentum, time and frequency, being and becoming, and so on.
Our ability to use logic is critical to us, it is a defining human characteristic and indeed is that thing which enables us to be critical.
The application of logic, representation and an ability to turn in unto itself (i.e. to verify its internal coherency) is its power.
Logic is always applied for purposes.
At the heart of poetry is the act of poiesis, the process of creation which reconciles mind and world.
We may say this of any artistic or aesthetic process (and indeed, art will abuse logic or go against reason for the sake of expression).
Such a process indubitably corresponds to the world in the instances of its creation, and there is certainty as to its correspondence.
What’s more, an aesthetic may be felt by others.
The logical contents of a poetic sentence may be invalid
but can still be meaningful (for otherwise it would not be poetic).
Poetry and lyric are inextricably bound up in language.
They closely track the threshold of reason and logic, but toe the line.
The possibility for meaningful communication arises independent from the probability of logical communication.
Meaning need not correspond to logic.
However, aisthesis is in the eye of the beholder,
and in this way art has is own issue of correspondence which is between others; thus it is an issue of interpretation.
Where logic strives for objectivity and is left with uncertain truths,
Poetry strives for inter-subjectivity but does not know it’s reach.
So things can be connected by meaning and felt as well as by cause and reasoned, but the relationship between meaning and causality then
is not a logically necessity
so much as meaningful necessity.
To establish a firmer contact between the two domains, we must constrain them through a practical bridge. There are many such crossings, but the stability of this bridge is most apparent in poetry.
Looking closely we see a relationship between phenomenal signs
and we fill in the empty spaces with proposed causes
such that it fulfills both meaning and logic.
The downfall of analytic philosophy
is its disdain for poetry.