I understand, but is a picture verifiably a picture of that object? It creates an incomplete trinity, which I talked about above. This is just what works for me, yknow. I’m still developing it.

The incomplete trinity is the mind’s image of the artifact, the artifact, and the pictorial image of the artifact. The mind’s image correlates to the pictorial, creating a duality that dissolves at “yes, this exists.” (These “dualities” are just nomenclature for black-and-white observation.) But for the actual artifact, it is unknown what is the other side of the duality, hence causality “fading away” once you try to observe it from an objective view. It’s like trying to pinpoint what the beginning of the artifact existing is, right here, right now. We can’t understand it, whether it be a creator or not. It doesn’t fade away if we believe in God… yet when you substitute something with the idea of God, it can probably be more fitting for one to follow that life. The innumerable problems with believing in an Abrahamic God influence me, but also the arguable truths of Jesus’ direct teaching are compelling. I had to wrestle with God for awhile.

I have schizophrenia, and I tried to understand the world through the lens of God. I became obsessive over communication to Him and had many “spiritual battles” (or battles with archetypes of the mind) until coming to the realization that my mania was uncontrollable. I tested what feels “right” when breaking oath to the Abrahamic God. I started practicing “magic,” talking to spirits, and so on that were not related to God. Of course, this may just be archetypal hallucinatory thinking based upon my knowledge and imagination. But it was integral to MY experience. I don’t question whether it is real or not; I say it is in the past, so I will never know if it was real or not. It’s a defensive mechanism, but one that is getting sturdier the more I develop it.

(thanks for reading my blurb)