* Materialism is a qualitative experience. The cultural /epistemological /literary assumptions that follow in the wake of this not being acknowledged are also experiences, also qualities, which lead to the unthinking assumption that a hammer is only a hammer, a tool. A utilitarian adjunct of anyone with a utilitarian purpose.

*There is, inherent in thought, a blank spot in the moment of conception. However, the thought itself, if entertained in a contemplative way, yields an experience of itself as a quality. Such a quality must be considered as belonging to the void, and if it is, the gap out of which it appears may be understood at last as the birth trauma of the idea.

*The nature of materialism as a mental construct is such that it yields utilitarian associations, and the materialistic thoughts tend to direct the train of thought away from the qualitative experience of the thought itself. That is to say, the thought of a hammer does not tend to offer itself as the essential experience of the hammer as an ontological awareness, but rather the thought of the hammer tends to offer itself as linked to further ideational content-- nail, board etc. . . .That this did not used to be true is obvious to anyone familiar with the Thor myth, or the Lady of the Lake, or any symbolic reading of signs

*Symbolism is now reserved as a special instance in the state's repertoire for the reinforcement for the social order

The construction of social symbols serves to obscure the resonant participation in numinous reality.

*Symbols in the service of the market reinforce the materiality that drives the marketplace, putting the material tautology ( I am what I
own. . .) in place of the divine tautology -- "I am that I am."*
The deconstruction of the symbolic leads necessarily to the indictment of culture-- especially when the "something more"
that is always left in sense perception (Merleau- Ponty Primacy of perception) is disallowed (positivism) or seen only as a resonance in the service of the "felt-quality" of materialism

*It is not possible for thinking to observe itself in the moment of thinking. It can only think about that moment afterwards. For this reason there is the lacunae that appears to be part and parcel of all thought. But this is, as Dr. Steiner pointed out, is simply a consequence of our organization-- that we are 'perceiving beings" and as perceiving beings we do not perceive ourselves perceiving, but instead perceive our thinking only after having thought. This moment of unconsciousness is a fecund and fertile moment in which the possibilities of the logos are opened and the organism itself is obscured in the conceptual moment. It is as if the entire organism must stand still and wait for the thinking stream to be born. And then, if it is desired, we may turn and direct our attention to that which we have just thought. This is exactly how a poem happens, save the poem depends on, or is simultaneous with, the quality of the word as music, as a gift.