Posted on

Mesotopia: Significant Findings and Contributions. Partial Revelation

If you spend nearly ten years on a thing – a thesis, a question, an ache – then what do you come away with? This is a problem that many researchers wrestle with long after their viva.

Tryg on the Coast by Will Halfacree

My thesis, Mesotopia: Towards a Place of Lyrical Inquiry (Verran, 2025), emerged from my exploration into the murky realm of meaning-making; into how humans make sense of their environment and articulate this through the art of language. While engaging with methods and approaches of scientific materialism, it was open to other, less quantifiable aspects of understanding. My approach exists between the hard data of environmental science and the soft collapse of attributing a lyrical utterance to a physical sensation. Mesotopia is that middle place. It is a weird, damp, mossy ground where you are forced to admit that you’re guessing, and that guess, that intuition, is something beautiful.

Here’s what I’ve learned, and I offer it not as truth but as partial revelation: all environmental research ends in conjecture. You can measure carbon flux. You can map watersheds, but the moment you ask why – why the tide is rising, why the magpie sings – then you have left the laboratory and entered the weirder world of the poetic. This requires intuition; not as a substitute for rigour, but as its strange twin. The best researchers I know don’t pretend to be robots or LLMs. They listen for what the data doesn’t say.

This became painfully clear when I tried to get a clean historical picture of Celtic culture. I wanted something tethered to the languages themselves: Old Kernewek, the living breath of Breton fragments. What I found instead was a hall of mirrors. There are no objective sources. Texts were scripted by either a monk or a cultist with an agenda. Every archaeological layer has been interpreted by a romantic, a nationalist or a grant committee. Anyone who proclaims certainty about Celtic culture should be eyed the way you’d eye a man selling miracle water from the back of a van.

This is the deeper sickness. Doing a PhD means watching how the money moves. You see funding streams shape ideological and political directions for corporate profit: pharmaceuticals, tech, and weapons. These industries don’t just buy labs. They buy histories too. They buy the humanities, indirectly, turning entire departments into PR factories churning out favourable narratives. There are red lines and guardrails everywhere. You learn them quickly. Don’t scrutinise the military applications or environmental impacts of all this wonderful new tech. Don’t question the ethics of corporate influence on land use. Don’t look at the family backgrounds of financiers recently termed ‘philanthropists’. Do that, and the funding dries up. The list goes on. This is the unspoken rule – to have any kind of career in Western academia, you need to learn when to keep your mouth shut.

I finished my PhD less certain about what is real. So much of academic work seems to be about inventing reality for other people to live in. I admit that I can never find my way through all the misdirections and dead ends, and that any meaningful clarity eludes me. On reflection, I don’t see that as a failure. That is the crack where light gets in. I’ve glimpsed the man behind the velvet curtain of western liberalism, working his bells and whistles and selling his snake oil, and I don’t believe him anymore. I do not believe in the neutrality of universities, nor in the clean hands of Western research culture.

I live in partial revelation. I am always listening. I am certain of nothing and sceptical of everything. However, I can still hope that somewhere – in a different kind of institution with a different way of asking – there is a place where intuition is honoured, funding doesn’t own the questions, and any person is free to research, interrogate or argue controversial positions.

As always, my a’th kar!

Follow this link to a video where I discuss this blog in more detail:

 

Posted on

On Celtic Nationalisms: (Aside) Why Does the UK Keep Spawning Strange Esoteric Cults?

While researching my PhD thesis, Mesotopia: Towards a Place of Lyrical Inquiry (2025), I spent considerable time visiting Celtic language communities and Celtic nationalist meetings across Britain. I went expecting to find what I’d romanticised: the last strongholds of living tradition, people gathering in draughty village halls to keep the old words breathing. What I found instead puzzled me deeply, and has since forced me to rethink my entire understanding of Celtic nationalisms and their revival.

Many of these gatherings were as I had imagined and were in village halls, but at some of these gatherings, I kept meeting members of esoteric orders, like Zionists and Mormons. They sat among Kernewek learners and Celtic nationalists, and I found myself asking the obvious question: what on earth are you doing here?

The answer is stranger than I expected.

The Hebrew Connection:

The links with Zionism emerge from something specific: the revival of the ancient Hebrew language. For many language activists, Hebrew stands as the great success story – a language of liturgy returned to public places. Israeli groups provided practical advice and strategies for growing the Welsh language during the latter half of the 20th century.

Beneath this practical solidarity lurked something more theological. For certain strands of Zionist thought, particularly those influenced by figures like Abraham Isaac Kook, the return to the Land and the revival of Hebrew were not merely nationalist projects but messianic events. So, if the revival of Hebrew carried political and theological significance for funders of the state of Israel, what of the revival of Welsh or Cornish? Is there some hidden financial or theological motive?

A Landscape of Secrets:

The truth is that the United Kingdom has long been a factory for esoteric orders that shape the political world from the shadows. We manufacture them the way Switzerland manufactures cuckoo clocks. To ignore this fact is to misunderstand our history. The history of the UK is littered with secret fraternities of posh boys performing rituals and rites. As ridiculous as they might seem to the uninitiated outsider – these people seem to believe whatever it is they are doing. Aleister Crowley alone spawned an evolving line of Thelemic sex cults, with their “Do what thou wilt” and elaborate initiations for posh boys and poets. The Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn, the Ordo Templi Orientis, the Typhonian Order – each has promised hidden knowledge to privileged devotees, and many of their practices still reverberate through respectable contemporary societies.

Then there are the British Israelites, who emerged properly in the 19th century with the claim that the British people are literally descended from the Ten Lost Tribes of Israel. John Wilson’s Our Israelitish Origin (1840) gave the movement its founding text, and by the 1880s, Anglo-Israel associations had sprouted across Britain. These were not fringe eccentrics in any simple sense – they included clergy, peers, and at their peak claimed millions of sympathisers throughout the former colonies. It’s no surprise that ideas from the British Israelites heavily influenced the Mormon church in the United States.

And yes – the modern Zionist movement itself, in its current ethno-nationalist political form, emerged from late 19th-century Europe. These aren’t just eccentric social clubs; the reason the US Empire has evolved into a crusading force obsessed with prophecy and rapture, or the state of Israel has become an ethno-supremacist state is because of weird fringe ideas that have gestated right here in the UK. The quirks of many of these cults tap into the same soil of romantic nationalism, biblical prophecy, and the conviction that ancient peoples could be reassembled in the present.

What Do They Want?

The ultimate goals of these secret esoteric societies remain, by design, hidden. We live in what I call a state of partial revelation – we glimpse fragments, but never the full machinery. Theosophists spoke of a coming World Teacher. Crowley announced the Aeon of Horus. British Israelites anticipated the restoration of the Davidic throne through the British monarchy. According to researcher of the occult Tracy Twyman, some secret societies have sought out a mythical ‘twilight language’ which conveys secret knowledge – this might explain an interest in old languages like Hebrew, Welsh, or even Cornish. The more I look into the work of figures like Edward Williams (also known as ‘Iolo Morganwg’) or Robert Morton Nance, the more I become sceptical of their motives or methods. Whatever their goals, scattered through all of the secret societies runs a thread of sectarianism, of chosen peoples, and of elect nations.

What becomes clear, viewed from ground level, is that such groups consistently function against the interests of the uninitiated – which means the common people. They work to create division – to balkanise not only territories but imaginations. The English Mistery of the 1930s, with its mystical feudalism and its “kins” of racially pure Englishmen, sought to roll back democracy and reinstate aristocratic rule. Rolf Gardiner, one of its leaders, wrote explicitly in German journals about reviving long-lost Germanic traditions in the English social order. These are not harmless antiquarians – they are architects of division, fear and paranoia.

Demystifying the Mystery:

Mesotopian logic demands a demystification of meaning-making. Not the crude demystification that pretends mystery doesn’t exist – we can never fully know the real world, and any claim to total knowledge is itself a power move. Rather, an honest demystification that names what is not known, that refuses the priestly gesture of hiding operations behind ritual.

Celtic languages do not belong to esoteric orders. They do not belong to neo-feudal aristocrats or digital landlords or prophets of racial destiny. They belong to the communities that speak them, learn them, dream in them – communities of ordinary people trying to hold onto something precious. The mystifiers would turn these languages into keys to hidden kingdoms. I say: let these languages remain what they are – words for sea and rock and magpie, for love and loss and the hope of conveying something meaningful or, dare I say, beautiful.

As always, my a’th kar.

I discuss this blog in more detail in the video:

References:

Allen, J.H. (1917) Judah’s Sceptre and Joseph’s Birthright. 15th edn. Haverhill, MA: Destiny Publishers. [Originally published 1902].

Armstrong, H.W. (2005) The United States and Britain in Prophecy. Edmund, OK: Philadelphia Church of God. [Originally published 1954].

Bogdan, H. and Starr, M.P. (eds.) (2012) Aleister Crowley and Western Esotericism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Carew, M. (2003) Tara and the Ark of the Covenant: A Search for the Ark of the Covenant by British-Israelites on the Hill of Tara (1899-1902). Dublin: Discovery Programme/Royal Irish Academy.

Dietz, B. (2018) ‘Sanderson, William John’, in Oxford Dictionary of National Biography. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Green, E.H.H. (2002) Ideologies of Conservatism: Conservative Political Ideas in the Twentieth Century. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Griffiths, R. (1980) Fellow Travellers of the Right: British Enthusiasts for Nazi Germany, 1933-9. London: Constable.

Hedenborg White, M. (2020) ‘Rethinking Aleister Crowley and Thelema: New Perspectives’, Aries: Journal for the Study of Western Esotericism, 21(1), pp. 1-12.

Linehan, T. (2000) British Fascism, 1918-1939: Parties, Ideology and Culture. Manchester: Manchester University Press.

Mirsky, Y. (2022) ‘Rav Kook: The Leading Thinker of Religious Zionism’, Brandeis University Jewish Experience, September. Available at:https://www.brandeis.edu/jewish-experience/history-culture/2022/september/kook-zionism-mirsky.html (Accessed: 16 March 2026).

Pasi, M. (2014) Aleister Crowley and the Temptation of Politics. Abingdon: Routledge. [Originally published in Italian 1999].

Platts-Mills, J. (2001) Muck, Silk and Socialism: Recollections of a Left-wing Queen’s Counsel. Wedmore: Paper Publishing.

Posen Library (no date) Abraham Isaac Kook: Biography. Available at: http://www.posenlibrary.com/author/abraham-isaac-kook (Accessed: 16 March 2026).

Sanderson, W.J. (1927) Statecraft. London: [publisher unknown].

Sanderson, W.J. (1930) That Which Was Lost: A Treatise on Freemasonry and the English Mistery. London: [publisher unknown].

Wikipedia (2006) British Israelism. Available at: https://webarchiveweb.wayback.bac-lac.canada.ca/web/20060913000000/http://en.wikipedia.org:80/wiki/British_Israelism (Accessed: 16 March 2026).

Wikipedia (2025) Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn. Available at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hermetic_Order_of_the_Golden_Dawn (Accessed: 16 March 2026).

Wikipedia (2023) English Mistery. Available at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_Mistery (Accessed: 16 March 2026).

Wikipedia Contributors (2025). Iolo Morganwg. Wikipedia. Available at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iolo_Morganwg (Accessed: 21 March 2026).

Wikipedia Contributors (2025). Robert Morton Nance. Wikipedia. Available at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Morton_Nance (Accessed: 21 March 2026).

Wilson, J. (1840) Our Israelitish Origin. London: [publisher unknown].

Wright, P. (2002) The Village that Died for England. London: Faber and Faber.

Yeats, W.B. (1901) Is the Order of R. R. & A. C. to Remain a Magical Order? London: Privately printed.

Posted on

Empirical or Intuitive Modes of Inquiry: Interpreting Information in a State of Partial Revelation

In my 2025 thesis, I make what initially sounds like a scandalous claim: all research, no matter how diligent, arrives at a moment of conjecture.

That’s not an attack on science. It’s not a flirtation with relativism. It’s an observation about what actually happens when we try to know something.

You can observe, measure, dissect, test and evaluate until you disappear into sub-atomic weirdness. You can triangulate sources, run regressions, peer review the life out of a paragraph – but eventually, you have to conclude. That conclusion – however sophisticated – is an educated guess.

A very good guess, perhaps. A responsible guess, but a guess nonetheless.

This is not a weakness in research. It’s a structural feature of inquiry in a world that only ever reveals itself partially.

In developing what I call a mesotopian mode of meaning-making, I found myself drawn to the speculative strategies of fiction – particularly the Utopian genre. World-building works by extrapolation. An author takes fragments of reality and extends them into coherent possibility. The reader recognises the plausibility not because every detail is empirically verified, but because the world hangs together. It resonates.

Research works in much the same way.

We gather fragments of the real. Data points. Interviews. Archival traces. Phenomenological encounters, and then we construct a model that accounts for them. We are not inventing from nothing. We are extrapolating from partial revelation.

Mesotopian logic simply makes this explicit.

Rather than pretending to empirical omniscience, it acknowledges the intuitive component in interpretation. It admits that at some point the researcher must lean into a felt coherence; a sense that the pattern is right; that the explanation fits.

Now, the immediate objection is obvious: doesn’t this throw everything into doubt?

No.

Because there is a real world.

I am not arguing that reality is optional or that truth is whatever we desire. The world resists us. It surprises us. It refuses to conform to our expectations. Much of it remains withdrawn, opaque, inaccessible – but not imaginary.

What we have access to are encounters. These are moments in which something shows up; a document that shifts your understanding; a conversation that reframes the field; a material object that refuses the narrative you were about to impose on it.

These phenomenological encounters inform epistemological comprehension. In other words, how things appear to us shapes what we can responsibly claim to know.

But between encounter and conclusion, there is always a gap.

And that gap is not filled by raw data alone.

This is where I detect something like an “intuitive phenomenology.” Not simply psychological bias, not wishful thinking, but a form of instinctive pattern recognition. The mind – and perhaps something deeper than mind – moves to complete the picture. It draws connections. It senses coherence. It fills epistemological gaps so that meaning can stabilise.

We already trust this process in everyday life. A seasoned organiser can walk into a room and “read” it. A historian can sense when an archive is hiding something. A scientist can feel when a model is elegant rather than forced.

These are not irrational acts. They are disciplined intuitions shaped by immersion in reality.

Mesotopian inquiry does not replace empiricism with vibes. It integrates empirical rigour with an honest account of the intuitive leap that always occurs at the edge of knowledge.

So empirical or intuitive? The answer is both.

We live in a state of partial revelation. The world gives itself, but never entirely. Our task is to respond carefully, rigorously, and imaginatively. Not to claim absolute certainty, but to make the most responsible guess we can – and to remain open when the world answers back.

As always, my a’th kar!

I discuss this blog in more detail on my Youtube channel:

Posted on

Mesotopia: ‘High Weirdness’ Against a Priestly Class.

I have a lingering suspicion that every movement, no matter how exploratory or liberatory it begins, eventually generates its own clergy. The people who explain its meaning to the rest of us. Not the be-robed, incense-and-lace variety (though give it time), but the interpretive class – the ones who assure you that what you think you’re seeing isn’t quite what you’re seeing, and luckily, they have the key. This caste hasn’t vanished; it has simply donned the corporate drag of the professional-managerial class.

Mesotopia, at least as I understand it, refuses that comfort.

If mesotopia is anything, it is the awkward recognition that the world is real – stubbornly real – but never fully available. Objects exceed us. Systems exceed us. Institutions exceed us. Yet each of us possesses the capacity to make meaning through our encounters with the environments we inhabit. And this is the crucial point: that process does not require a priestly caste to mediate it. Partial revelation is not the same thing as authorised revelation.

We live in an age addicted to interpretation. Scroll any feed and you’ll find someone explaining what the data really means, what the conflict really signifies, what the text actually implies. It’s a lucrative posture. It flatters the explainer and infantilises the audience. The message is always the same: the real is too complex for you. Leave it to us.

Mesotopia pushes back.

If meaning happens in the encounter – if it is co-constituted in that charged space between me and what I meet – then no one gets to claim exclusive access to it. The mesotopian event is democratic in the most unsettling way. It insists that you are already implicated in the making of sense. There is no backstage pass.

This is not relativism. The world bites. History happened. Power concentrates. Money moves in very specific directions. But the claim that only a sanctioned cadre can interpret these realities is itself a power move. It is theology dressed up as theory.

You see it everywhere. In academia, it appears as jargon that sometimes functions less as precision and more as initiation rite. In activism, where sometimes a deviation from approved vocabulary can feel like heresy. In politics, where technocrats speak as though code and program were sacred texts decipherable only by the ordained.

Mesotopia requires a certain slowness – a willingness to dwell in encounter. Each experience is turned through association and intuition as we try to understand the environment in which we find ourselves. Yes, the real withdraws. Yes, structures operate beyond immediate perception. But that does not invalidate lived encounter; it intensifies its importance. The fact that we never grasp the whole does not mean we grasp nothing. It means we work provisionally, relationally, in good faith.

A priestly class thrives on the promise of total vision. Mesotopia is content with fragments.

There is something profoundly anti-authoritarian about admitting that revelation is always partial. It levels the field. It allows disagreement without excommunication. It acknowledges that I might hear something you don’t, and you might notice something I’ve missed – not because one of us is enlightened, but because we are differently positioned within the same recalcitrant world.

The danger, of course, is that mesotopia itself becomes doctrine. That someone eventually writes the catechism: “Thou shalt interpret thus.” I can already hear the conference panels.

So let me be clear. This is not a retreat into the political monad, nor a New Age hymn to the sovereign self. We are not isolated atoms floating above our biological or socio-political milieu. Our environments include community, history, institutions and power. Meaning-making happens within those entanglements, not outside them. Nor do I believe in some private enlightenment waiting at the end of sufficient introspection.

Mesotopia is not a ladder to ascend above others. It is a reminder that we are already entangled in something that exceeds us – and that none of us owns the veil.

No robes. No incense. No vestments. No authorised intermediaries.

Just the difficult, ordinary work of meeting a world that will never fully disclose itself – and refusing to let anyone claim exclusive rights to its mystery.

As always, my a’th kar!

I discuss this post in more detail on my YouTube channel:

References:

Davis, Erik. (2019). High Weirdness: Drugs, Esoterica, and Visionary Experience in the Seventies. MIT Press.

Verran, Tristan. (2025) Mesotopia: Towards a Place of Lyrical Inquiry. University of Plymouth Archive.

Posted on

Mesotopia: Towards a Politics of Partial Revelation

One of the quietly awkward things about Object-Oriented Ontology (OOO) is watching very clever people try to prise a politics out of it without breaking the crockery. Graham Harman tends to sidestep the issue, while Timothy Morton leans into it with a kind of earnest bravado. Morton’s move toward ecognosticism, and the attempt to locate this within a Marxist framework in texts like Humankind, is genuinely interesting. However, it also feels slightly misaligned. Classic Marxism is grounded in class analysis, historically specific struggles, and the evaluation of material and economic exploitation. OOO, by contrast, flattens the ontological field. Everything withdraws. Everything is weird. The risk is that a politics emerging from OOO may be interpreted less as a material project and more as a kind of nihilistic mood that risks favouring apathy over engagement.

The former Duke of Cornwall with his long-time friend and confidant ‘James’.

I explore this tension more fully in my thesis, Mesotopia: Towards a place of lyrical inquiry, but the short version is this: I admire the effort to push OOO into the political sphere, even when I don’t think it quite lands – and that misfiring is instructive, because it reveals something important about knowledge itself.

While researching the mechanics of mesotopian meaning-making, it became increasingly obvious to me that all research, no matter how rigorous, eventually arrives at a moment of pure conjecture. There is always a moment where the evidence runs out and interpretation takes over. Mesotopia names this space. I live here. We all do, whether we admit it or not. It is a state of partial revelation.

This is not as exotic as it sounds. In fact, it has deep resonances with classic Marxism and even elements of Maoism, where political life is understood to be structurally occluded. Much is withheld – not necessarily because it is illegal, but because it would be politically embarrassing, destabilising, or simply inconvenient if widely known. The very existence of scandals that sit at the periphery of respectable political discourse – such as Operation Gladio or Jeffrey Epstein – points to this condition. Power does not announce itself clearly. Decisions are made elsewhere, in rooms you and I, dear reader, are not invited into, using codes and languages we have not been taught to speak.

My own experiences of working at the fringes of empire have only reinforced my thinking here. I do not know the truth of political machinations at the highest level, but I do know, with absolute certainty, that the general public does not know everything either. This isn’t paranoia. It isn’t fear. It’s political realism.

Often in my research, I return to old-fashioned historical materialist strategies – following flows of money, mapping institutional relationships, noting who funds whom and why. These methods can clarify motivations and alliances that otherwise seem baffling. However, they do not constitute conclusive proof of wrongdoing. Many financial arrangements are perfectly legal. They are simply hidden because they don’t look good under fluorescent light.

This is why I’ve found Erik Davis’s approach in High Weirdness so refreshing. Davis manages to acknowledge the unknown, the speculative, and the unresolved without sliding into mockery or credulity. He takes uncertainty seriously.

I encountered something similar while researching the Cornish language. I plotted the publishing output of writers who have subtly pushed narratives of Baltic and Celtic nationalisms and arrived at a moment of conjecture – why are they doing this? I also didn’t understand why certain groups of people attended some Celtic language meetings. I still don’t. I will never know the inner motives of esoteric groups. Mesotopia teaches me to live with that – not as resignation, but as orientation. Not knowing is not a failure. It is the condition of political life. However, this does not mean that we simply accept ‘not knowing’ as a reason for ‘not doing’. On the contrary, I suggest that a politics of partial revelation encourages us to continue to participate in a project to attend to our local environments even though we cannot possibly know everything.

I can state what I know and intuit what I don’t.

From my research, I observe that industrialists, financiers, and right-wing factions often push nationalist narratives to appeal to the sensibilities of certain minority groups. For what ultimate reason, I cannot know; my intuition, however, is to remain sceptical of their intentions. Partial revelation is the rule, not the exception, and politics begins not with certainty, but with the refusal to be paralysed by its absence.

As always, my a’th kar!

You can follow this link for a video discussion of this blog:

References:
(1) Davis, Erik. (2019). High Weirdness: Drugs, Esoterica, and Visionary Experience in The Seventies. The MIT Press.
(2) Harman, Graham. (2016). Immaterialism: Objects and Social Theory. Polity.
(3) Morton, Timothy. (2017). Humankind: Solidarity with Non-human People. Verso.
(4) Verran, Tristan. (2025). Mesotopia: Towards a Place of Lyrical Inquiry. The University of Plymouth. https://pearl.plymouth.ac.uk/ada-theses/113/

Posted on

Introducing The Mesotopia: Living Between Physical and Symbolic Worlds

I often begin by saying that my approach to meaning-making differs sharply from the purely materialist assumption that ‘there is a real world and it can be known’. The mesotopian position, by contrast, begins from the more unsettling but, I think, more honest claim: there is a real world, but it can never be completely known. This is not a retreat into relativism or mysticism; indeed, I argue for demystifying the process of meaning-making. I advance a philosophy of embodied recognition that every act of knowing is situated, partial, and mediated through the strange vehicle of human experience.

In the mesotopia, meaning arises not from the fixed solidity of matter, nor from the abstract play of language, but in the dynamic, lived zone where sensing, thinking, and doing meet. The prefix meso- means “middle,” and it’s in this middle terrain that I locate philosophy as a practice, not as a system. It’s a space of tension, friction, and constant negotiation—where perception and intuition interweave to produce what we take to be “the real.”

Materialism offers the comfort of certainty: a belief that, if we look hard enough, we can strip away illusion and stand before reality as it truly is. The mesotopian approach rejects that fantasy. Instead, it invites us to dwell in partial revelation—to see knowledge as a series of embodied engagements that illuminate fragments of the world while inevitably casting others into shadow. What we call “understanding” is not the conquest of the unknown, but a dance with its irreducible strangeness.

This is where the idea of weirdness enters. In my work, weirdness isn’t about the quirky or bizarre, but about that unsettling quality that appears when reality refuses to be fully domesticated by human thought or desire. The weird announces itself when our conceptual frameworks falter—when the world shows itself to be more alive, more complex, more surprising than our categories allow. Weirdness, then, is not an obstacle to meaning but the sign of meaning’s vitality. It’s the pulse that reminds us we are both active and passive participants in a strange confederation of things that keep their secrets.

In the mesotopia, to encounter weirdness is to encounter reality itself. Our bodies, our gestures, our creative acts—these are not secondary to thought but integral to it. The way we move, speak, and make art are all ways of negotiating that strange boundary between what can be known and what forever escapes categorisation. Philosophy, in this sense, becomes an art of attunement—a way of staying sensitive to the rhythms of a world that exceeds our grasp.

So the mesotopian project is neither to master the real nor to deny it. It is to inhabit it—to live in that fertile middle space where knowledge and mystery coexist, where the world’s weirdness is not a problem to solve but a companion to think with. To be mesotopian is to make meaning a bodily act, to feel thought as movement, and to accept, joyfully, that the real will always remain just beyond the horizon of what we can name.

As always, my a’th kar.

x

A link to an informal vlog discussing this blog can be found here:

A link to my recent thesis in The University of Plymouth’s archives can be found here:

https://pearl.plymouth.ac.uk/ada-theses/113/