Quotes About Sensory

The subject of sensation is a power that is born together with a certain existential milieu or that is synchronized with it.

My organism--as a pre-personal adhesion to the general form of the world, as an anonymous and general existence--plays the role of an innate complex beneath the level of my personal life. My organism is not like some inert thing, it itself sketches out the movement of existence.

The living physiology of the nervous system can only be understood by starting from phenomenal givens.

The unthought can only appear through contact.

The sensible world is full of gaps, ellipses, allusions.

The unity of the object does not lie behind its qualities, but is reaffirmed by each one of them: each of its qualities is the whole. Cézanne said that you should be able to paint the smell of trees.

The unconscious: excess of the perceptual over the notional.

Alg?m görsel, dokunsal ve i?itsel verilerin toplam? de?ildir. Bütün varl???mla, bütünlüklü bir ?ekilde alg?alr?m: Ayn? anda tüm duygular?ma konu?an biricik bir yap?y?, biricik bir varl?k biçimini kavrar?m.

The perceiving mind is an incarnated mind.

The contact with the perceived is not ignorance and is not knowledge.

Our glances are not "acts of consciousness," each of which claims an invariable priority, but openings of our flesh which are immediately filled by the universal flesh of the world.

Since things and my body are made of the same stuff, vision must somehow take place in them; their manifest visibility must be repeated in the body by a secret visibility. "Nature is on the inside," says Cézanne. Quality, light, color, depth, which are there before us, are there only because they awaken an echo in our body and because the body welcomes them.

The adoption of a level presupposes the expressive relation between the perceived and ourselves, presupposes our settling into it, that is to say, the raising of certain of its elements to the status of dimensions...The sensible thing speaks a certain language to us which we understand just as if a linguistic agreement were established between our perceptual system and it, as if we spoke its language without having learned it = expression.

Until three months, the infant does not have the concept of his own body but only an impression of incompleteness.

The first exterior contact, the first exteroceptive stimulus, is the human voice.

The imaginary, said properly...is the carnal double, internal equivalent, secret figure of the real.

All vision, no matter what color it may be, is a kind of thoughtscreen (which allows for the overflowing of other thoughts)-- Vorhabe and sedimentation.

Painting...gives visible existence to what profane vision believes to be invisible; thanks to it we do not need a "muscular sense" in order to possess the voluminosity of the world. This voracious vision, reaching beyond the "visual givens," opens upon a texture of Being of which the discrete sensorial messages are only the punctuations or the caesurae. The eye lives in this texture as a man lives in his house.

I feel the substance of my body escaping through my head and crossing the limits of my objective body when an ascending elevator stops abruptly.

The body is not comprehensible in the actual.

Every external perception is immediately synonymous with a certain perception of my body, just as every perception of y body is made explicit in the language of external perception.

What makes the weight, the density, the flesh of each color, each sound, each tactile texture, of the present and the world is that he who grasps them feels himself emerge from them by a sort of coiling up or redoubling, fundamentally homogenous with them, that he is the sensible coming to itself and that in return the sensible is to his eyes lime the double or an expression of his flesh.

Just as the speaking subject only understands and speaks as a possessor of a system of gesticulation defined by dimensions of variation, the subject that perceives movement can only do so inasmuch as he possesses the equivalences of a sort of natural language: that's what sensory fields are, given diacritical systems with use values and characteristic equivalences. But between these fields there are also equivalences, like a common language of these dialects.

The form is a visible or sonorous configuration (or even a configuration which is prior to the distinction of the senses) in which the sensory value of each element is determined by its function in the whole and varies with it...This same notion of form will permit us to describe the mode of existence of the primitive objects of perception. They are lived as realities, we have said, rather than known as true objects.