EVOLUTIONARY CYCLES & PSYCHOLOGICAL BACKGROUND

Psychological obstacles on the linear path that induced a circular thinking
It is through this ambiguity of perception, that I noticed certain personal psychological blockages during my research and thus describes my own artistic projection in which I’m trying to resolve and dissolve those issues, in order to make them visible & to form a practice around them, so I can integrate the psychological shadow dynamics of the unconscious mind.
So as a preparation for inviting you into the lens I took for my own observations and playful study of the circulation, I would like to outlay and describe a personal psychological transformation that I lived through during this process, which then also gave rise to the overarching conceptualization of adopting the circulation as a methodological research perspective.

Relative truth - A reflection around the quality of research as a mode of operation
The evolutionary intention with the documentation of my artistic research process begun to unfold during a personal psychological growing process of being able to find the balance between a very profound need for exploration of diverse perspectives; and to find meaning in understanding the world through intellectual perception.
What tended to happen - what I sporadically observed during my research process - was a very wide spectrum of a tremendous amount of gathered information & diverse approaches and methodologies that lacked depth & hereby induced a personal reaction of judgment towards my own research process. Especially in the beginning of the research, I was not able to create a cohesive narrative, that would facilitate the overall integration point of my work. This judgment then revealed itself as a blockage in my creative process that gave rise to the process of necessary confrontation.

What tent to happen was when I gathered some information and I expressed it in a certain way, I always came up against a paradox of some sort. Either through some information that contradicted my previous established curiosity, - as in an outdated, and not being in alignment with the research methodology in the status quo -, or it gave a point of view that allowed the established working methodology to feel limited by nature, analog to the paradox described above. The subsequent searching came out of a need to find order from this occurring chaos.
So the way I explored diverse working methods & measured data was very dynamic, open and changing in nature, jumping from working method to working method in a free manner, which then took me to the previous example of chaos, again leading to “I need to know more questions. I need to figure something more out.”
The more I found information - the more I started actually opening up to the infinite dimensions within research depending upon the point of perspective one takes, resulting in relative truths. A question is leading to more questions. That is where I experienced the multiplicity principle mentioned above, which then guided me to thinking in a circular way.

At the same time I experienced the paradox of relative truth: How can my perception of the research process be circular and linear at the same time? Both represent truths and yet, contradict each other. Which perspective should I adopt?
Within the same analogy: How many of us during the covid pandemic spend a great time searching out of a need to find order from chaos? There was a ton of information. What was true during that time? What was false during that time? What is false information anyway, and what is actually a fact checker? At play is the paradox of relative truth.

Committing to a circular view in perception

Unaware of the depth of this experiential relative truth, it initially settled a chain reaction to an insecurity around personal validation & value of my work, as well as any contextual contribution, that would lead into thought patterns of judgment and the psychological complex of “I really need to learn & explore more, in order to find a cohesive narrative and value in my work.” And that sent off the cycle for exploration. Specifically a consistent ever-changing exploration. These cycles, the concentric cycles - circles, arcs, or other shapes which share the same centre, consisting of the entirety of this documented research - go over and over and over again, gathering lot’s of information, traversing different fields of study and using diverse methodologies.

With the perspective of circularity as a methodology, it is important for me to emphasize, that the consistent exploration without initially finding a cohesive narrative, revealed itself as not necessarily a negative thing, in a sense of that the exploration needed to be adjusted, even though my validating patterns initially demanded a clear structured framework.

I started to be aware of the quality around my mode of operation when looking at information, as well as allowing myself to be fully immersed in the process.

How I love to explore things, to circulate around topics & facts, to develop opinions, to communicate these opinions, to share my ideas, to allow them to be expressed on a recurring basis and then to move on. All of these functions came along naturally. But along the road, what I mostly found was intellectual discord.

The intellectual discord occurred due to the judgment around not achieving a sense of depth after committing to a particular methodology. A lack of configuring a consistent narrative during the immediate immersion in my research. Mostly through the lens of a wide reaching perspective during the exploration that is strongly influenced by a mental association to intellectual analysis, which would concluded my direction of research as outdated, or not in alignment with my intuition and curiosity after adopting a particular methodology.

Upon several experiences of crisis during the research, the circulation pointed for me towards an approach, that is all about being curious, all about exploring, giving up the need for finalized structures and consistency, thus completely dropping into the quality of circulating around the playful observation of study. To ultimately stop evaluating the linearity of events, because the circulation can be picked up any time again. There is a subtle but powerful difference in perspective to linear- and circular thinking.
If I would not finish, or further develop a certain methodology that I was committed to - due to reasons like a shift in curiosity towards a different aspect, or simply found myself bored within a particular established working method, I easily felt as if I had failed. - I initially valued the finishing of something as successful and not being consistent with something as being a failure.

Each individual artistic process that happens within a person deals with different psychological evolutionary processes (Described within Jungian Psychology and Therapeutic Astrology.) - And through this research at RMC, the process of making this subconscious mode of operation aware, represents a profound artistic- and human growth.

The circulation is opening up another dimension and possibility of surrendering to pure flow in absence of the need to be conclusive and consistent, because it irradiates the linear perception. It showed me ways to create meaning without being consistent in what I’m exploring and pointed to an omnipresent potential in each working method, in each cycle, which would reveal it’s true gifts and meaningful moments upon seeing the investigative process as a never-ending circulation, discovering more and more gem stones through playful contemplation.

It is my wish that the documentation of this transformational psychological process from linear- to circular perception, illustrated through my artistic outcome, can be illuminated and hopefully inspire others with similar experiential patterns.

It is the way I am looking towards the world which is unfolding through and for me, that is defining the quality of vital force flowing through me. I, myself create and give birth to the quality of my thoughts and life.