At present the problem of communication is treated from many points of view and with different methods. In the case of verbal language, it is known that words suffer by the loss or transmutation of their meaning. Reviewing the etymology is, possibly one of the most usual ways in the attempt to understand the meanings that these words carry.

By referring to the dictionary on a regular basis, we ask ourselves: do the meanings of  of a word coincide with etymology or do they coincide with its current use?

In other modes of communication, in the case of visual language, there is not always the claim that the meaning matches its term, as is often required by the term, as verbal language often demands (there are dictionaries). It’s precisely in the field of visual thinking where we began to develop the concept that it carries, by which perhaps, its most direct equivalent is in the word notion.

The word notion and the concept it presents is what concerns us at this moment.

In order to compare these two languages we turn, as a first step, to etymology.

Cicero introduced into the Latin language the word "notio, notionis" (notion). In fact, he translated with this word the Greek terms ennoia (énnoia) and prulhyix (prolepsis). Ennoia was used as idea, thought in general, while prolepsis meant an anticipated "idea" or "image" formed by the spirit of an object.

We also consulted the dictionary of philosophy which defines notion, in a very general way, as the idea or concept that one has of something, and more specifically, a sufficiently basic idea or concept of something.

In our opinion and through what we have been experiencing, this word could mean or conceive with great breadth a mode of the existence.

When we read "anticipated idea", which is possibly the first thing that the word notion suggests to us, and which is the word notion suggests to us, and we revisit the idea that it is anticipated, anticipating, anticipatory by anticipating another supposedly more finished idea of things (generally called knowledge). Things (which is generally called knowledge) and perhaps in the belief that the word notion could be expanded or re-semanticized, we went in search of the precise limit at which a notion can be the precise limit at which an idea ceases to be anticipated in order to be complete, and we were 
even concerned about what would be the beginning of the starting point of anticipation.

With this concern in mind, and for a time, different experiences could happen to us, which, in a way, were different experiences that, in a certain way, we are amused to relate.  

Below is an example of such notion:

A person who is sitting, next to him, on the floor, a cockroach passes by. The person manages to catch it with his foot, presses and crushes it. The person thinks, although perhaps the situation also thinks - I have killed it; the cockroach has killed it.

He assumes that he killed it and the cockroach is dead. After a while, the person discovers that the cockroach moves one of its legs; - one of the cockroach's legs moves. The man presses his foot on the cockroach, spreads it on the floor and says: - the cockroach is dead.

The person remembers his childhood or imagines it: a child sitting in front of a microscope looking at a cockroach. microscope looking at a dead cockroach; a disassembled cockroach, a part of its body under the microscope. The child watches in amazement; life is revealed through the movements that follow one after another on the platelet.

 

The change of perspective (childhood), is what makes the partialization of the real (cockroach). Partialization of the real (cockroach) and the partial happening (death), are diluted giving way to another understanding of the fact.

In this experience the idea "it has died" or the more personal "I have killed it" fades away as the idea of "It has died" or the more personal "I have killed it". As a finished idea and is presented to us as an anticipated idea. Anticipated. The person, it could be said as a moral, believed, in the first instance, and as a first instance, and as a convention, to know death.

 

This anticipatory idea notion, expands upon the finished idea knowledge. While this anticipation did not allow us to know about the beginning or the end of that anticipation, it did not allow us to know the beginning or the end of that anticipation.

Beginning or end of this anticipation, it did allow us to begin with the amplification of the meaning of this term. An extension that had already been presented to us in visual terms and that had already been presented to us in visual terms and that recognizes, in addition to the problem of anticipation, the idea as a man's own and therefore as a partialization that the resemanticization of the concept notion overcomes.

The problem of being, the problem of reality and man's need to grasp or understand these problems, is echoed in the different ways that he uses to approach the different ways used to approach or to place himself in the world and to understand his existence. He thus resorts to different tools of interrogation: philosophy tools of interrogation: philosophy, science, and less formally as he does through art.

 

Exemplifying through the different branches of scientific knowledge we notice that they do not find precise limits in their exploration:  (things are understood by means of different systems, but their absolute reality are not generally their absolute reality and are not generally understood). Thus, the analysis of a vegetable leads us to the analysis of its tissues; from these to the analysis of the cells, to the molecular composition, from there to the analysis of the atoms, their protons, electrons, the "intermediate space", and so on, and so on. Successive divisions in flight.

We see, then, that it is difficult, through the different modes of scientific knowledge to achieve a finished idea (in the literal sense of this word) of things.

 

We cannot fail to point out that this problem, unlike the problem of notion is given in part by the fact that knowledge requires the obligatory knowledge demands the obligatory perspective of man’s perspective towards things, i.e., the relation of things, that is, the subject-object relation.

Just as in science, the subject-object relationship has been practically constant in philosophy and in art. Even the articulation of verbal language is based on this relationship.

 

Beyond these considerations, it should be noted that when art happens (we prefer to say, when the artistic happening is actualized), these subject - object boundaries vanish, a fact that we see as very close to the problem of the notion, but it is very difficult for us to avoid the fact that the art support does not mark this relationship, as in the case of science and philosophy.

We want to emphasize the obviously notorious difference between art and art support or support of art. When we say that the support or language of art marks the subject-object relationship is because this support, from the objectual point of view, must be placed in some sphere or must have a certain form (book, picture, painting, etc.) which constitutes a determined form (book, painting, sound, etc.), while art does not happen neither in the object nor in the art happening neither in the object nor in the subject but would be a true existential experience.

 

On the other hand, notion or we could say "notionalization" allows the person to relate to plants, utensils, to himself/herself and to the universe in general (a way of existing). But this notionalization is not only a human property: a bird flies in the fog and suddenly perceives an obstacle that it immediately avoids. Just as the meaning of a word, which may have been conceived by man, can conceive realities or situations that are outside of him, we can outside him, understand the potentially absolute reality that each term presents.

​

We may say then that the bird had a notion of the situation; its being notionalized in the whole allowed it to avoid the clash. And we wish to at this point that, when we say notion in explaining this example, we are not referring example, we are not referring to a consciousness on the part of the bird, nor are we speaking of the intuitive.

​

A mode of articulation of the real is what determines this experience. This articulation of the real, which we can conceive of as happening in a common rhythm (in simultaneous expansion and contraction), would be a mode of existence, the mode in which the obstacle and the bird, the stones and the earth, coexist. Bird, stones and earth, earth and man and ideas coexist. And because one rhythm is common to another, all the parts of all the parts, the whole of itself, and its parts constitute the whole of itself.

The word notion, which has at present very general and varied uses (we were surprised, among others, by the fact that notion had been the problem of the trinity), suggests to us meanings that are not limited to the meanings that are not limited to perspectives, but would have a universal character. We are not concerned about the different hierarchies that could be established between things when they are "understood".

A mode of existence, an anticipation that arises from the identification of the universal in itself, would have a universal character. The identification of the universal in itself, would suggest the notation.

The resemanticization of the concept notion proposes a mode of understanding different from that of knowledge. Displaced, bent or dissolved the anthropomorphic archetypes (quadrature / verticality / horizontality), the horizontality), the dialectic is de-attached and de-objected, towards the universal identification, with less aesthetic responsibility and
inevitably closer to the good.

 
A chance encounter:

The mind jumps back and forth, towards the irrepressible search for a new discontinuity. The permanent exercise of a relocation, the balancing solfeggio of the artist, achieves and decides, in a dissolution, the object that marks the attempt: the work.The artist decides to appropriate the axis where to support the balance of the mind.

 

Thus, gathering the vectors of a multidirectional energy, which he does not "know" but his sensibility "possesses", in a zone of evidence constitutes, floating and isolated, the point of reference in the infinite plane of its sensitive "discomfort". Discomfort extinguished in the instant prior to the evidencing of that mark that is the object called "artistic". Artistic to support that ostentatious gratuitousness that is a condition of its condition of its architecture. NOCION is the nomenclature that protects this decision of Eduardo Capilla.

 

Eduardo Capilla's decision, and that in a desire of intellectual rootedness tells us that it is a CONCEPT.

Intellectual roots tells us that it is a CONCEPT.

​

Already affirmed in this possession, the mind is axis and sway, and in the mobile knot that this position and in the mobile knot that this position finds, an outbreak of will generates the artifacts-crystallized artifacts from this totemic reference that is Nocion.

 

It is necessary to look into the rough world that the delicacy of this appropriation provides: it is the agitated dictation of infinite desired and undesired conclusions that are cut out in that opportune moment that allows us to see for an instant what we could have to see for an instant what we could have forgotten without knowing. A state of paradox that is familiar to us in the instant of perception and flees to a scale perception and flees towards a scale that hides it without hiding it, the one where we unmuddle: the association.

 

NOCION: the optical permanence of the mind in a delicate signal.

 Renato Rita.