I sometimes find the expression, it is what it is, overused and oversimplifying since it doesn’t account for point of view, perspective, or context; it’s a hermeneutical short circuit.
I’ve played around with the terms text and context in other posts. Context means woven together, and text means woven.
Weavers’ shop talk (Arquette, 1974), as it were.
I learned today that the word tissue is related to text too. We often talk about the fabric of society, its many textures; but, what about the texture of the universe? What about universal tissue?
I’m still thinking about Between, mirrors, and inter-independent subjectivity in relation to interpreting and understanding texts of all sorts, tangible and intangible. Weren’t you just asking about that? We so underestimate sense making and, consequently, settle for less and less. I’m thinking political discourse, marketing, educational psychology, etc.. We’re told we’ll go off the deep end if we unglue ourselves from the loyalty wall and approach sense making eclectically, pragmatically, and collaboratively. Soon each of us will be hopping around and around in a private, one-legged sack race, taking personal responsibility for one one-hundredth of his or her cognitive capital and sacrificing the rest to what, an antiquated but persistent hermeneutical habit?
But wait! “Cada uno es hijo de sus obras.” Aha! Cervantes had Sancho Panza himself say this in Part I, Chapter 47 of Don Quijote de la Mancha. Who better than Sancho to balance things off, turn things up-side-down and inside-out? Roughly translated, We are the children of our works. Oh, the offsprings? Never mind.