What is the Catalyst Behind Everything?
Last essay I wondered about the reason of our existence, what is our end as human beings? I don’t know if that question is going to be answered someday, I like to think that it will but at the same time I’m afraid that we would loose our essence, which is curiosity. The interesting part is that we believe we are the center of the universe, that we are the most important creatures. We talked about that with Blum and Armando, and I’m not quite sure if we are the most important part of this creation, maybe we are just a part of it. Of course, we are rational and have many other characteristics that make us human, and that no other species have. But are we really the center of the universe? What if there are other rational beings in outer space? Can we really call ourselves the center of the universe? I think that is a very arrogant claim because we’ve seen through centuries that we are more ignorant than we think; we are always discovering striking information about our universe, and our nature as human beings.
We are exploring the nature of our universe along the nature of our mind. Our mind, the most complex thing we know on earth. Are we ever going to understand it? Are we someday going to create one that works exactly as ours? A question raised in Blum dialogue was: Is it possible for the mind to know itself? It isn’t possible yet. But if I think about Hofstadter, we can’t understand our mind because we cannot pop-out our system, we are trapped in there. However, I think a way to understand our mind is with the input of others. I mean, by living in a society or cooperating with other human beings we realize how our mind works for an outsider. Is it then that we know ourselves because of the input others have on us? By this I mean their reactions, opinions about us, etc. Imagine that you are alone on an island; you’ll get to know yourself, do things you like and satisfy yourself. However, you won’t know on what do you have to improve on, or if what you’re doing is ethic, moral or logic. So my question would be, are we going to be able to understand our mind or are we “understanding” our mind with the aid of others? I believe that we can’t really understand our mind just by ourselves; I think we do need someone who’s outside the system. I’m not sure though, maybe we can understand it by ourselves. But I’m referring to individual minds, not “the mind” of human beings. And that’s the big question, how does “the mind” works? What makes it work? What is the “fire” that sets it alive? Do we need someone outside our system, not a human being, in order to understand it?
Despite of that, I do believe that even though we can’t pop-out our system we can be self-aware. I came to that conclusion after my experience at Finca El Zapote. I spent a lot of time just with nature, and myself without speaking, just being aware. We can’t pop-out our system because I never escaped from my thoughts, but I was extremely aware of them in pure solitude. Maybe I can’t understand myself and understand why I think the way I think or even why I think. But we ought to have a leap of faith in order to keep sane, as Ferguson would say. So, I know that I think, that I exist and that everything that I perceive exists as well. From time to time I remember what Blum told us about a theory that everything is created by our minds and it doesn’t really exist. It’s scary to think that because it makes me doubt. And that’s why science was so punished during the time of Galileo, because it made people doubt and question. It’s so hard not to question and wonder about the purpose of everything. While being at my spot at Finca El Zapote, which I named “The Yellow Tree House” I was just observing the patterns, the symmetry, the perfection of how everything worked. Nature is impressively complex. Everything has a reason to be. All the species have a “task” in this world. They are always there, living, and most of the time they are unnoticed. Why do they act they way they do? Why do we? Why everything works the way it does?
Regarding symmetry, Ferguson inquiries about if we impose it or if is it really there. Does our mind impose symmetry? Maybe it’s part of our nature because we tend to find beauty in symmetry; we have had theories defended just for the sake of their true beauty and simplicity. However if we do impose it, how comes it coincides so perfectly with reality? In “A Philosopher Looks at Science”, Kemeny states that we ought have some assumptions in order to approximate more to truth. So, maybe this coincidences are just approximations to reality, and that’s why they are always evolving, because someone else will find a way to approximate more to truth. It reminds me of what Wilson says about scientists: “They come each day thinking subconsciously, It’s there, I’m close, this could be the day.”
Plato says: “one must search the things one don’t know, rather than not looking for it”. Just imagine our world today if no one had looked, searched or wondered about anything. Where would our species be? What makes us wonder? What creates that drive that made Copernicus create the heliocentric system and find more answers? Are we created to be that way? Are we born with this curiosity and with doubts? Do they come from a chemical in our brain? Are they metaphysical? Are they a cause from evolution? Maybe when we are able to understand how our mind works we will find out this answers, but meanwhile we’ve got nothing more than to have a leap of faith or just wonder about these complexities and imagine the catalyst behind them.
We are exploring the nature of our universe along the nature of our mind. Our mind, the most complex thing we know on earth. Are we ever going to understand it? Are we someday going to create one that works exactly as ours? A question raised in Blum dialogue was: Is it possible for the mind to know itself? It isn’t possible yet. But if I think about Hofstadter, we can’t understand our mind because we cannot pop-out our system, we are trapped in there. However, I think a way to understand our mind is with the input of others. I mean, by living in a society or cooperating with other human beings we realize how our mind works for an outsider. Is it then that we know ourselves because of the input others have on us? By this I mean their reactions, opinions about us, etc. Imagine that you are alone on an island; you’ll get to know yourself, do things you like and satisfy yourself. However, you won’t know on what do you have to improve on, or if what you’re doing is ethic, moral or logic. So my question would be, are we going to be able to understand our mind or are we “understanding” our mind with the aid of others? I believe that we can’t really understand our mind just by ourselves; I think we do need someone who’s outside the system. I’m not sure though, maybe we can understand it by ourselves. But I’m referring to individual minds, not “the mind” of human beings. And that’s the big question, how does “the mind” works? What makes it work? What is the “fire” that sets it alive? Do we need someone outside our system, not a human being, in order to understand it?
Despite of that, I do believe that even though we can’t pop-out our system we can be self-aware. I came to that conclusion after my experience at Finca El Zapote. I spent a lot of time just with nature, and myself without speaking, just being aware. We can’t pop-out our system because I never escaped from my thoughts, but I was extremely aware of them in pure solitude. Maybe I can’t understand myself and understand why I think the way I think or even why I think. But we ought to have a leap of faith in order to keep sane, as Ferguson would say. So, I know that I think, that I exist and that everything that I perceive exists as well. From time to time I remember what Blum told us about a theory that everything is created by our minds and it doesn’t really exist. It’s scary to think that because it makes me doubt. And that’s why science was so punished during the time of Galileo, because it made people doubt and question. It’s so hard not to question and wonder about the purpose of everything. While being at my spot at Finca El Zapote, which I named “The Yellow Tree House” I was just observing the patterns, the symmetry, the perfection of how everything worked. Nature is impressively complex. Everything has a reason to be. All the species have a “task” in this world. They are always there, living, and most of the time they are unnoticed. Why do they act they way they do? Why do we? Why everything works the way it does?
Regarding symmetry, Ferguson inquiries about if we impose it or if is it really there. Does our mind impose symmetry? Maybe it’s part of our nature because we tend to find beauty in symmetry; we have had theories defended just for the sake of their true beauty and simplicity. However if we do impose it, how comes it coincides so perfectly with reality? In “A Philosopher Looks at Science”, Kemeny states that we ought have some assumptions in order to approximate more to truth. So, maybe this coincidences are just approximations to reality, and that’s why they are always evolving, because someone else will find a way to approximate more to truth. It reminds me of what Wilson says about scientists: “They come each day thinking subconsciously, It’s there, I’m close, this could be the day.”
Plato says: “one must search the things one don’t know, rather than not looking for it”. Just imagine our world today if no one had looked, searched or wondered about anything. Where would our species be? What makes us wonder? What creates that drive that made Copernicus create the heliocentric system and find more answers? Are we created to be that way? Are we born with this curiosity and with doubts? Do they come from a chemical in our brain? Are they metaphysical? Are they a cause from evolution? Maybe when we are able to understand how our mind works we will find out this answers, but meanwhile we’ve got nothing more than to have a leap of faith or just wonder about these complexities and imagine the catalyst behind them.