relation of media to (the) self
Media (a form of correspondence of a thing through a medium) is a filter. A blockade. A intellectual pursuit (or perception that leaves/keeps you intellectually engaged), that cannot (or usually doesn't) leave the individual (yourself/myself) “fulfilled”. Now, I am not saying that the media, or mediums that carry that media isn't “real”. It's real “enough”. But does it leave you/I with a sense of FULFILLMENT of having been there, done that, learned from, experienced, etc.?
What if someone said you can get married, buy a house, and have children – but a medium had to be the in between point of these happenings? Wouldn't be a very nice life, would it?
Living vicariously, saying you (or I) “know” something because it happened on TV, read it on the Internet, etc. is categorically false. You can have TRUST that a thing happened, and that there is TRUTH in that TRUST, but the genuine act of KNOWING anything takes more legwork. More experience. More perceptual stimuli and sensory stimulation.
I am talking about an individual level of REAL and BELIEVED. Two different things. Having been there, experienced a “thing”, smelled smells, talked to other humans in-person, interpreted organic light through my eyes – that is a “thing” I could consider (in fact, know) is/was REAL. On the other hand, trusting what a Website told/showed me, hearing through speakers on a device of an experience that someone ELSE was told (trusting the truster, sort of), and a neverending heard from, heard from, heard from hopscotch, or chain, of beliefs – there is almost nothing “real” to that.
So what am I getting at?
There is no substitute for “REAL”. There is no substitute for “EXPERIENCE”. And there is no fulfillment in anything but envolopment in/at an event, occurrence, what have you.
Just an observance.
... now I'm at >>> olry.co 👋