We speak, at times, as though belief were a lighthouse of reason, casting clean light across the troubled waters of perception. A belief is something one holds — like a coin, a child, a candle in the wind. It is deliberate, conscious, and tethered to a logic one can defend, however shakily. But beneath belief, beneath the glass-and-stone house of reason, there stirs a darker animal. It flinches at the abyss, recoils from the porcelain cup shaped like a bedpan, weeps for a fictional child who was never born. Tamar Gendler has named this creature alief.
Alief is not an error in logic. It is a logic before logic — oneiric, instinctual, soaked in the sediment of evolutionary time. We may believe that the transparent balcony is structurally sound, that we are thirty stories above a safe, modern city. Yet our toes curl inward as if gripped by an ancestral terror, as if we still inhabit the fragile limbic architecture of creatures for whom height was death. The alief trembles while the belief recites facts. It is a schism that opens within the self — a subtle madness, a holy inconsistency.
And here lies the horror, or perhaps the glory: the self is not singular. It is a theater, half-lit, with actors who do not share a script. The alief does not consult the belief before stepping onto the stage; it merely appears, wailing or laughing or dry-heaving in response to a world it did not invent but cannot ignore. It is the part of us that gags at the fecal-shaped fudge, that shudders at the uncanny mask, that prays while knowing no god is there.
There is something religious in the alief — not in its content, but in its structure. It is the leap that precedes the Kierkegaardian leap of faith. It is the tremor before theology, the sigh before prayer. A man may believe in no afterlife and yet alieve that his dead father watches over him. A woman may believe that the communion wafer is mere bread, yet alieve that it must not be dropped. In these moments, the rational ego is dethroned — not by madness, but by the echo of older codes inscribed in flesh.
The body, after all, is a fossil of previous logics.
Consider the aesthetic dimension. Why do we cry at tragedies we know to be fictional? Why do we flinch at the villain's blow, or ache for the doomed lover who never lived? Gendler’s alief helps explain this tension between cognition and sensation, between knowing and feeling. But the explanation does not exhaust the mystery. The alief is not merely the brain’s stubborn reptilian artifact — it is the persistence of myth within the modern. It is the daemon in the machine, the tragic actor in the comedy of rationalism.
Perhaps this is why we resist it. Alief embarrasses the Enlightenment ego, the one that wants clean hands, clean thoughts, disinfected desires. The ego says: “I believe this food is safe.” The alief says: “It looks like shit — I will not eat it.” The ego says: “That’s just a doll.” The alief screams when the doll moves. The ego says: “This ritual is empty.” The alief kneels anyway, crosses itself, whispers the name it pretends to forget.
But what if alief is not our enemy?
What if it is truth in another key?
It is not opposed to belief — it is its underground twin, its feral sibling, the voice that continues to sing when reason falls silent. Gendler’s insight opens a wound—but also a portal. Through alief, we glimpse the porousness of the self. We begin to understand how phobia, art, religious ecstasy, and magical thinking are not aberrations but expressions of the self's multiple strata. We begin to see that human consciousness is not an empire of logic but a haunted palace — each room lit by a different century, a different instinct, a different prayer.
In a world dominated by hyper-rationalism, the concept of alief is a necessary heresy. It reminds us that we are not machines who sometimes malfunction, but creatures who sometimes dream in public. And those dreams — irrational, inconsistent, trembling — are not lies. They are aliefs. And in their shadows, we live.
No comments:
Post a Comment