Why has poetics not yet been realized?

Poetics has not yet been realized because artists are keen on direct artistic expression without asking what the inspiration itself is. Of course, the difficulty of being identified with inspiration itself can also lead artists to engage in a direct expression.

The difficulty of inspiration lies mainly in the fact that it is difficult to initiate the sensual intuition of consciousness, and the transient and accidental nature it presents is only an appearance.

No one can realize that inspiration is something so different, that is, that the two existences of man are distinct, but the contingent and transient nature of inspiration determines that man does not have enough experience to confirm its knowledge. This is mainly due to the fact that the property of "one" of inspiration is invisible.

In fact, everyone has some experience of inspiration, but some people are aware of its existence when it comes, while others are not aware of its existence even when it comes, so it is the same as not experiencing it. Of these, for those who are able to realize it, part of them stop experiencing it, while the other part begins to express it artistically, and there is art.

Here, everyone has experienced inspiration-everyone is capable of sensual intuition, which must facilitate the embodiment of art, because one is essentially the same in being in inspiration as in art. Of course, both inspiration and art itself are facts to be confirmed, the difference between the two being that the former is implicit, while the latter is explicit.

However, the focus of our cognition should be on inspiration, rather than directly on art, because this allows us to examine the whole process of the explicit and implicit operation of artistic creation as a whole. Of course, if one wants to confirm the knowledge of inspiration, one again needs to start with art, because only it is a universal fact that can lead to universal knowledge.

Here, the aim remains clear: the first thing to be confirmed is inspiration, because only when inspiration is confirmed is it possible to further confirm the principle of art.

Since inspiration and non-inspiration are the distinction between "one" and non-one, and artistic expression is based on "one" and the expression of "one", then what one expresses in a non-inspired state cannot be art, but It can only be an artifact. But it is still necessary to confirm what art is, and to distinguish non-art through art, because non-art itself cannot be confirmed.

This initial distinction between inspired and non-inspired remains quite crucial, and it concerns whether one is creating art or not. And the distinction between inspired and non-inspired is also a distinction between poetic and non-poetic. It is important to establish the notion that all art is poetry. To confirm the knowledge of art is to be confirming what poetry is.

At the same time, it is necessary to realize that although inspiration is independent - non-expressive - it does not mean that poetics is independent, because poetics is confirmed in the process of confirming the principles of art.

Poetics, of course, remains independent in relation to philosophy and theology, and its realization is directly accessible through art.