Corrie van Wijk
16-02-2008, 11:32 AM
We do not know if before the beginning there was knowledge at all, but since we think we
have knowledge now, we think that there would be knowledge to come, at least at some
point after the beginning. Before the beginning we do not know if it, if anything, was
similar or different from what we think we know now. We can only imagine what was, if
anything. If so, if different, it can not be described unless in terms of the known.
If we say 'I don't know', at least we know that we don't know something, if anything. Not
knowing what you don’t know makes it impossible to even be aware of what is beyond your
present knowledge, or even to imagine that there would be anything.
Nor can we imagine what is impossible to know because we have no means of sensing it. All
we can hope for is to improve our techniques of sensing information, our ability to
select what’s relevant and rely on our brain to put it all together in a coherent way,
which will allow us to gain insight in how it all works: that is, if it would be
different from what we think it is. For what if we think what it is, is no more than our
senses make of it?
If it is what it is because we think it is that way, reality would be no different from
what we think it is. If some of us think the same way about what it is, it might seem
that reality is not much different from what we think it is, because we all came to the
same conclusion. We might think that a reality exists independent of what we think of
what it is, and the best way to know about it is to have some sort of consensus about
what it might be. But what if reality exists only in our thinking? What if we exist only
in our thinking? What if our thinking only exists in our thinking, would our thinking
exist at all? And if everything we perceive exists somehow or another independent of our
thinking, how much is our thinking capable to change things, or do they only change in
our perception? And if not through our thinking as such, is our interaction between our
perception of what we think things are and what they really are, of any influence on
changing what things really are?
A scientific theory is our best guess at some point in time of what we perceive. We do
not know if our perception has any relationship with something different from us. Any
representation of the world outside, if any, is produced by the (conscious) brain in
cognitive terms of spaces, shapes, geometrical forms, symbols (language, mathematics,
images), etc.
Just a few centuries ago mankind wasn't aware (didn't think) of how far time and space
stretched into the past and outside, nor do we yet know now how long it will last and how
far it will go.
have knowledge now, we think that there would be knowledge to come, at least at some
point after the beginning. Before the beginning we do not know if it, if anything, was
similar or different from what we think we know now. We can only imagine what was, if
anything. If so, if different, it can not be described unless in terms of the known.
If we say 'I don't know', at least we know that we don't know something, if anything. Not
knowing what you don’t know makes it impossible to even be aware of what is beyond your
present knowledge, or even to imagine that there would be anything.
Nor can we imagine what is impossible to know because we have no means of sensing it. All
we can hope for is to improve our techniques of sensing information, our ability to
select what’s relevant and rely on our brain to put it all together in a coherent way,
which will allow us to gain insight in how it all works: that is, if it would be
different from what we think it is. For what if we think what it is, is no more than our
senses make of it?
If it is what it is because we think it is that way, reality would be no different from
what we think it is. If some of us think the same way about what it is, it might seem
that reality is not much different from what we think it is, because we all came to the
same conclusion. We might think that a reality exists independent of what we think of
what it is, and the best way to know about it is to have some sort of consensus about
what it might be. But what if reality exists only in our thinking? What if we exist only
in our thinking? What if our thinking only exists in our thinking, would our thinking
exist at all? And if everything we perceive exists somehow or another independent of our
thinking, how much is our thinking capable to change things, or do they only change in
our perception? And if not through our thinking as such, is our interaction between our
perception of what we think things are and what they really are, of any influence on
changing what things really are?
A scientific theory is our best guess at some point in time of what we perceive. We do
not know if our perception has any relationship with something different from us. Any
representation of the world outside, if any, is produced by the (conscious) brain in
cognitive terms of spaces, shapes, geometrical forms, symbols (language, mathematics,
images), etc.
Just a few centuries ago mankind wasn't aware (didn't think) of how far time and space
stretched into the past and outside, nor do we yet know now how long it will last and how
far it will go.