Conscious & Subconscious Material

is first of all, not the matter with this issue (maybe nothing is). Nor is it always a cause or material witness, but may be a product, in the sense of multiplication under and over the table. Thinkologists lave long looked to discover specific inner motivations, trapped as they were in the "childish" question "why?", the only word which to many delivers "knowledge" as a psychological state deemed a step above the "common sense" of experience and in fact, justifyies authority, most importantly, their own. Criminologists feel quite at home in this camp, especially since response to stimuli has become passé in the least and at most completely discredited, just when they were making headway with the idea of free association beyond the notion of complicity with guilty parties.

But what thinking person, or child for that matter (or more correctly, issue) would ask the 'why' question unless suspecting something foul or fishy with the affirmation given, not to mention endless, regimented ultimatums? I'm with Poe on this incorporeal matter when he discussed the imp of the perverse. That is the inner genie proficient in outer possibility – its chief question is "why the hell not?" – and lets you know there's always an alternative, even to consistency [a systematization of beliefs is never necessarily true; that is the confusion of what is with what the calculus can do (Wittgenstein)].

Ulterior motives are said to be secret and therefore, interior as well, often acting out without our awareness til after the fact – hence, ubiquitous guilt. Atheists who believe this is a function of nature or physis and not contingent on a generalised social fucktitude (nomos) are revealed to be abject christians after all. The theory is that these "drives" are ultimate or primary. In this sense they resemble gods and politicians with inner demons (or outer puppeteers) imbued with the dark magic of evil forces not ill-resembling some parents. Youth, even in Plato's day were prone to be heard to say, at least under their collective breath, "fuck you!" The literary romantics were first to formulate this into an axiom of nature: "Out of the mouths of babes comes the wisdom of the ages". To this day it is thought by some there resides, even in the elderly, an inner child which must be nurtured to achieve happiness. Freud called it the Id, a collective of recognised possibilities which might come to fruition as desire. More likely, it seems, comes interest for contemplation, particularly for those trained from an early age to suppress or whittle down their wishes. Without the imposed dialectic between thinking and doing by permit-granting institutions (permissive is not here the operant word), participation is added to the mix.

A secret wish is said to be incriminating if it does not arise from duty or responsibility. Desire is less incriminating if it entails a sacrifice or attempts to contribute to others' profits or pleasure. Most folks are not so single-minded and that is not generally considered a fault or lack, since the overly obsessive so often come across as anal fools on a collision course with absurdity. When facing uncertainty as to which desire is to be fulfilled or direction taken, economists have invented the cost-benefit ratio. It is the logic of utility wedded to a payoff. In an earlier day, important decisions were left to a toss of the dice – they called it "divination" – should the albatross or osprey not appear signifying land was nowhere near – they'd call that "reading the auspices". Without certainty, one must take a chance, and Socrates himself said certainty may be the biggest of the social fabrications. Who knows what the gods have in mind? There was also a time when such a question was taken neither literally nor figuratively, but then, it was an age of poet heroes more concerned with good Loki or Fortuna than debt collection or seeking a reward, as then as many heroes fucked shit up as saved the day, and that was to be expected (or so the Tricksters say).

Today, rationality is derived from economic calculations (and proved by a luck in the draw) to materialise a fortune. An educated guess usually indicates insider trading. It's not quite the same as the proficiency of a skilled carpenter or mechanic well familiar with certain tricks of their trade. Kirk once asked Scotty if he'd always exaggerated the time factor for his repairs, to which the engineer replied "How else could I be known as a miracle worker?" Some calculation is often invaluable to avoid falling into the abyss or out of space, but it is the near misses which provide the highest educational opportunity. Otherwise it's just all rote, and where's the consciousness in that?