Audio Essay: Thesis and Anti-thesis

Freedom vs. Destiny

It’s easy to fall into the trap and assume that the opposite of freedom is an empty lack of freedom or imprisonment.

“The soul is free when it is educated.” – M. Eckhart, Goethe

On the opposite side of freedom lies a choice. The Choice is what ends freedom and reduces it to actualization. Freedom is potential (numerous) choices, and Destiny (non-freedom) is one choice.

We make this choice, or the external makes the choice for us. The illusion is of the individual assuming otherwise.

The drawing of the simplest mandala is the most illustrative example of the relationship between freedom and Destiny, potential and actualisation.

Mandala 1

A circle describing a point. The circle is an infinite series of points (choices), or an exponent of freedom, while the point in the middle represents the “singularity” of Destiny, or as Jung says, the Self.

Ref: Jung’s autobiographical sketches of daily Mandalas

Mandala 2

A circle cut in half (into two semicircles). In this mandala, the separation of the whole by the Center line is shown. Two sets, thesis and antithesis. This mandala in its simplest interpretation represents three points, connected by a straight line (alignment of three points). Thesis, Antithesis, and the Relation between. The point of relation (Center) is an exponent of the Self and the basic reference point based on which thesis and antithesis are aligned (recognized). This Mandala is the first step in the coordinate determination of the Self and the first step towards Destiny Choice.

Mandala 3

A circle describing a point, and connected by a spiral. We all want to reach the Center, and we reach it through “freedoms”. Freedoms decrease, or “purify”, in cycles, and gravitate towards the Center. The Center is the Goal and the final step.

Freedoms push, the Center pulls. Ref: Terence McKenna and the theory of time (novum).

Maturity of consciousness is needed for Destiny. Infantile awareness, as the predominant collective neurosis, complicates this form of awareness. In a Biblical sense, the Devil is dressed in “new” garments and presents himself as the most beautiful angel, freedom.

Comment:

Free will and multiverse movies

We can often interpret movies as compensatory manifestations of our collective (or personal) shortcomings. The era of superhero movies portrays a picture of individual impotence, which is somewhat understandable due to the time we live in. However, multiverse movies provide a more interesting compensation. Compensation for the lack of free will. By depicting endless arrays of potential scenarios and possible realities, they relativize the importance of singularity behind phenomena but provide the comfort of indefiniteness (freedom).

Individual state – How Human is greater than the Cosmos

The collective existence of indefiniteness is permissible to the Cosmos, which measures its story in billions of years, and its development has practically just begun, however, this is not a good position for the individual.

Our insignificance in years, on the other hand, offers us a solution.

Every story consists of three constituents: Beginning, Middle, and End. These constituents make up the story of the Cosmos as much as they make up the story of a single Human. Although our experience of the Cosmos is of something almost Infinite, although we feel practically frightened by this magnitude, there exists in us another feeling of greatness standing as opposition to this fear. That greatness is the greatness of hypothetical inner infinity, which is as great as the external infinity, only its miniature representation.

Both infinities stand in a parallel, balanced relationship. However, while the external Infinity will potentially need hundreds of billions of years to reach the “Middle” of its Story, inner Infinity has the advantage of accelerated development.

Wrong unit of measurement (reference)

“So the World works, so will I,” is the basic fallacy. The “World” has time. The World is part of the Cosmic narrative.

The entirety of our story (beginning – middle – end) is written and played in about 100 years. All chapters, all transformations, all conceptualizations, all actualizations, all archetypal representations.

The differences between the beginning and the middle, as well as the middle and the end, are evident. These are differences between the young and the mature, the mature and the wise. It is also evident that the world is still in the infancy of its teenage years. This child is not an ethical-aesthetic norm, but merely a reference to the stage of development. A reference to the collective antithesis, which is at the beginning of development and will need much more time to mature.

The post Thesis and Anti-thesis | Interpretations of Basic Mandalas appeared first on The Architectural Mythologems.

On Architecture, Art, Language, and Philosophy – A New Synthesis

Architecture is not merely a structure; it is a meta-structure, a profound synthesis of art, language, and philosophy. It is a living dialogue between material and metaphysical realms, where architecture becomes a narrative medium—each structure telling a story, conveying emotions, and reflecting the collective consciousness of its time.

The Artistic Dimension

Art in architecture transcends the physical form; it is the embodiment of human creativity and expression. Buildings, like great works of art, are not static objects; they are dynamic entities that interact with their surroundings and evoke a range of emotions and thoughts in those who experience them. In this sense, architecture is akin to a visual symphony, where each element—from the curvature of a wall to the interplay of light and shadow—contributes to a larger composition.

Art, much like the process of individuation, is an unfinished datum—a continuous journey toward an ever-elusive ideal. It is within this perpetual striving that we find the essence of creation, where each attempt brings us closer to a stable ideal, yet the journey remains incomplete. This dynamic is geometrically illustrated in the Paths of Individuation project, where the stable square is never fully realized. Each successive step attempts to complete it, yet it remains part of an unending pattern—a visual metaphor for the ongoing process of growth and self-realization. The architectural design reflects this ever-developing part of artistic methodology, emphasizing that both art and individuation are ever-evolving, always in pursuit of perfection, yet inherently embracing the beauty of their perpetual incompleteness.

Language as Structure

Language is the framework within which architectural ideas are conceived and communicated. It is through language that we give shape to abstract concepts and translate them into tangible forms. However, architectural language is not confined to words alone; it is a multi-sensory experience, where visual, tactile, and spatial elements converge to create meaning.

Architecture functions as a distilled language, where every element, form, and material serves as a precise signifier in a broader narrative. Each design encapsulates a dialogue with its cultural and historical context, reducing complexity to its essential elements while still conveying profound meaning. By refining architectural language to its purest form, spaces are created that resonate deeply, allowing the subtleties of context, intention, and emotion to emerge with clarity and impact.

Philosophy: The Underpinning of Design

Philosophy in architecture is the pursuit of deeper understanding and meaning. It is the inquiry into the fundamental principles that guide the creation of spaces. We believe that architecture is not just about solving practical problems; it is about exploring the human condition and addressing the existential questions that arise in the process of design.

Architecture is deeply intertwined with philosophical exploration, where space becomes a medium to express and embody complex ideas. As a language of form and structure, architecture serves as a tangible reflection of philosophical concepts, with the unity of diverse elements under a cohesive design narrative conveying profound meanings. Each line drawn is not merely a functional gesture but a response to an underlying aesthetic-logical system, anchoring the design in a broader philosophical and cultural context. Through this lens, architecture mirrors the epochs, creating spaces that resonate with both the historical continuum and the evolving human condition, inviting reflection on the interplay between individual, society, and the unfolding future.

A Unified Vision

At the heart of our practice is the belief that architecture, art, language, and philosophy are not separate disciplines but interconnected facets of a single vision. This vision is one that seeks to create spaces that are not just buildings but living symbols—expressions of the values, beliefs, and aspirations.

The post On architecture, art, language, and philosophy appeared first on The Architectural Mythologems.

Why does the Wizard look at the sphere?

There is a well-known story of a wizard (the archetype of a Wise Old Man), who has the power to look into the sphere from which he reads the future. The sphere is a pictorial representation of Pleroma. The sphere is potency. In order to read the “objective” future from the overall potency, we need a stable reference point of the Present. Based on this point, the historicity (identity) is written, and based on the historicity, the future is anticipated (projected). This reference point is the archetype of the Wise Old Man because it is he who shapes the objective (Logical) direction. The ordinary person, through the sphere, necessarily reads (writes), the wrong (unfinished), image of the future because he experiences the image of the world (reference point) through the subject’s prism of the burdened ego. Ref: Leonardo’s Salvador Mundi (Christ with the Ball) – a moralistic story

Comment: This folklore story has extended over time to witches, sorcerers, or wizards who serve the Shadow. Deviation from the archetype of the Wise Old Man to the archetype of the Clown and the archetype of the Shadow is an insinuation that an excessive focus on the future is not necessarily morally correct, or that it potentially entails trouble. Perhaps it is only the Spirit of the Present Time that seduces into wrong (temporal) definitions.

The advice I give myself

I have noticed that I often give people one piece of advice, and that is to try to read (interpret) their waking state and events in the same symbolic language with which we read dreams. We can also consider all the awake performances that we experience as archetypal. These are minimal and fragmented archetypes, mostly laden with anti-examples, but again, the picture is there. By reading our own historicity, through the logical-visual prisms of archetypal representations, we categorize and gather (synthesize) objective sets (Noah’s task).

The post The wizard’s sphere appeared first on The Architectural Mythologems.

Brother M once perceived the Present (absolute now moment). From all that has been experienced, the following conclusion has been drawn: The Now is constituted from the ontological element which is the exclusive Present. In its exclusivity, the Now does not allow memory to form around it, ergo the Now can never belong to History (memory). The Now is a visual logical figure, which holds consistency. It is obvious that the Now is necessary, so that, in complete contrast to it, we can form the past (identity). After the formation of the past (memory-identity), with the constant energy of the Now, we have a predisposition to form (anticipate) the future. The more complete our definitions of the past (the elements within logical laws), the greater the possibilities within anticipation (more precisely). Ref: The story of Noah.

The Now is a relation-structure (potential binegation), that contains sets of the past and sets of the future, as well as sets of the interior and sets of the exterior.

The post Brother M and the Present appeared first on The Architectural Mythologems.