Forms… just lying under there…

As with most things, this book is coming at me in a very subconscious way. I’m a very subconscious person; I’m just open to that.

So, I’m driving down the street today and it hits me – another way in which this book is far bigger than I originally imagined. Why? Well, you see…

I’m driving along and I suddenly hear Vicky say, “You can’t define success any way you want. Everyone knows what success is.”

Did I mention she wasn’t in the car?

This sets off the spark.

Does everyone know what success is?

“Of course.” she says. “Think about the underlying forms.”

Underlying forms.

I suppose I should mention right now that this isn’t really the right term. I mean, it is but it isn’t…

Moving on - - -

When she said this, it brought to mind Plato’s theory of forms. The idea is that all chairs represent a single, perfect chair, or that all humans represent a perfect, ideal human. And it occurred to me that this was just so much hogwash.

Wait just a second, I thought… I’m calling Plato’s theories hogwash?

Yes, but they are!

I couldn’t argue them before. After all, the theory is pretty self-evident. Think about chairs. A chair with two legs is obviously inferior to one with three, which is also inferior to one with four. The movement towards a perfect chair is self-evident.

What makes it hogwash?

Back to the chair. Take a newborn baby. Put him in a chair or have him look at a chair. Will she know that the one with three legs is, in any way, inferior to that with four? Of course, not! The whole in Plato’s theory is that it is wholly subjective, requiring a posteriori information. In other words, you need information on which to base that judgement. For something to truly be an underlying form, it would have to a priori, recognizable without any previous information.

Now, to success: Can there be an ideal success? A success better than other successes? Of course, not! Trying to wedge that concept into an ideal state, forces you to realize how open for interpretation it is!

Where the term “underlying form” came from, I don’t know. Again… subconscious. But it applies swimmingly well to a concept so far beneath our daily reference that it escapes rational thought.

It was when I hit the term “rational” that my spine began to bristle.

I mean, I’ve already defined “success” as non-materialistic in nature. Now, I am broadening the definition to include irrational.

There was a lot more swimming through my head but, by the time I got home, this was all I had and, reading it now, I’d say it’s enough…