"The most important decision we make is whether we believe we live in a friendly or hostile universe."
- Albert Einstein
I believe this statement is way, way more profound than one might easily think.
The person who comes to the universe as a friend is inexorably on his way to love, freedom, god, source.
The person who comes to the universe as an enemy (which is what he does if he believes the universe is hostile) is trapped for as long as he has that attitude.
(Note: obviously, by "universe" I include life, people, intelligence. Not just stars and rocks.)
29 comments:
Easy to agree with old Albert here. Another way to put it would be:
"The most important decision we make is whether we believe we have control over our life experience, or we are under the mercy of outside forces." -ttl
That is also an important consideration, but I don't think it's quite the same thing. I think many people believe they are at war with the universe, but goddammit, they are gonna win!
I hear you, but your example implies the belief of mere parcial control.
If you believe you have full control over your experience, why would you make the universe hostile towards yourself? (For added challenge? :-)
Or to put it another way, a person who believes she is at war with the universe does not by definition believe she can control her life experience to a great degree. Certainly not to her satisfaction.
But Einstein's maxim is a useful way to 'trick' the mind and provide a beneficial suggestion when one has not yet accepted the wider, more fundamental belief.
Another useful method: Rather than assuming mere friendlyness, become a pronoid and assume the universe is conspiring to help you in all your endeavors.
"your example implies the belief of mere parcial control"
Do you know anybody who thinks he has full control? The weather bends to his will, anything he wishes for appears spontaenously, everybody does what he says, he is immortal...
When a person discovers that those things are not true, there are those two basic ways to react.
Sure. I and many others who subscribe to the many worlds interpretation of reality (the currently prevailing theory in quantum physics, vouched for by Einstein, Feynmann, Stephen Hawking and many others.)
Now, a clarification is in order: Though I do believe that, for example, the weather bends to our will, continuously and without error, this does not mean that it bends to our thoughts. Thought is not how we direct our experience.
But it does mean, for example, that in our respective realities the weather may be entirely different even when we are standing one meter from one another. And it does mean that we can consciously affect it through various indirect methods.
Also, it is possible to momentarily experience a state where the subjective and object experience merges, giving the effect of direct control, and I suppose ultimately we will be able to do that very easily. (I'm sure signalroom can do so already! :-)
But in regards to the topic of this thread, the belief that we are responsible for all outcomes is sufficient. Granted, for someone who has never wondered this direction in philosophy, this is not an easy subject to grok.
But I thought you have. For I seem to remember that you mentioned What the Bleep in a post some time ago. Even though I haven't read it myself yet, I understand it touches this subject.
I have.
But I think "control" is the wrong term, for to most people it implies conscious manipulation by human mind and thoughts.
But that implication is correct! We cause outcomes through conscious manipulation by human mind, and also often think about what we are doing while doing it (thought not always).
It's just that due to the thickness of time/mass there's a delay in every effect (unlike, for example, in a lucid dream). And partly because of this we often fail to connnect the outcomes to our actions.
But I agree, "control" is not the most accurate word. Some people use the word "create". It is, perhaps, more accurate but due to its associations to art and God, it may also be misleading to some.
I wouldn't think it correct to say that there's a delay. Linear time is a false dichotomy, a flawed paradigm we assume true because it's the way our minds interpret our experience. Every second we live we inhabit and experience simultaneously. It appears to happen in sequence because it would totally overload our senses otherwise. So it is not time/mass that provide this buffer, or delay, its our strength of belief in linearity and limitation.
I propose that every willed creation is brought into being instantaneously, it simply takes the path of least resistance in getting to us. A million dollars popping into existence from out of nowhere would be totally unbelievable, so it comes into existence at a point we perceive to be in the future and by holding our focused intention the cause-effect chain is set into motion until, at last, our future has become our now.
My Blog:
http://philosophysword.blogspot.com/
My MySpace:
http://www.myspace.com/lucidtwilight1406
"The most important decision we make is whether we believe we live in a friendly or hostile universe."
- Albert Einstein
We live in both equally. Sometimes I just don't get this guy. Besides, other than Heaven and Hell, and the Earth people, the universe is empty space. There are no aliens, et's and all that.
The universe was created by Lord Jesus like a decoration for this magnificent Earth.
They keep sending robots to mars blah blah wasting millions of dollars seeking out life. Sigh. It doesn't exist there.
It appears to happen in sequence because it would totally overload our senses otherwise.
Well Blade, if it doesn't happen in sequence than we are all insane.
No argument intended. But sequence is relevant in and for EVERYTHING.
It's a reality and not a delusion.
You can't create or build anything out of sequence. It's a proven fact. To think otherwise would be insideous.
"It's a reality and not a delusion."
And who defines it as such?
We do.
I function from a paradigm wherein the world is neither as solid as it appears to be nor is it what it appears to be. It would take far more time than I have to explain it, but I understand where you're coming from. There is no disagreement between us, just different ways of living.
My Blog:
http://philosophysword.blogspot.com/
My MySpace:
http://www.myspace.com/lucidtwilight1406
"Do you know anybody who thinks he has full control?"
Well, I have. But it turns out it's not as easy as I expected. God's tricky!
Eolake said...
"many people believe they are at war with the universe, but goddammit, they are gonna win!"
Hahaha! That's SO true! :-D
ttl said...
"But in regards to the topic of this thread, the belief that we are responsible for all outcomes is sufficient."
There is (alas?) a fundamental limitation : if any of us can change the world, this change has to take into account the changes that others are causing too. For example, if somebody is bent on ignorant hatred, it is unsure that you'll succeed in changing *them*, or all that they do. Remember a bloke named Adolf Hitler?
We can always try, and we have to. But while remembering that others may have another agenda. There is no all-powerfulness if it is shared by many. (Remember the legions of greco-roman gods? Too many, therefore none supreme. Often tricked by mere mortals!)
So, basically, you're right, but it's not universal. Einstein did insist also on a little notion called Relativity... ;-)
Peaceful Blade said...
"Linear time is a false dichotomy, a flawed paradigm we assume true because it's the way our minds interpret our experience."
Weeeell... in the physical concept of measurable duration, it does have some very realistic implications, like energy and the acceleration of gravity. So, here too, the illusory nature of Time is to be taken relatively.
"What's Relativity? Well, an hour spent with a beautiful young woman will fly by like a minute, but a minute on a hot oven will feel like an hour." - Einstein
"It appears to happen in sequence because it would totally overload our senses otherwise."
Not only that. In A Brief History of Time, Stephen Hawking demonstrates, via the theory of information, that whatever the true nature or direction of Time is, we can only perceive it in the direction of increasing entropy. It's directly related to the fact that our brain uses energy to store information on a cellular level. So, basically, whether Time is simultaneous, non-existent as such, or going backwards in reality, it is by definition impossible for us to perceive it any other way than we do. Because we exist in a material body. Our thinking process is based on the metabolism of energetic molecule TPA (Tri-Phosphate Adenosin). Hence our perception of linearity. For the duration of our corporeal life, at least. (Outside of that, of course, you may freely assume anything you like.)
You may believe that Time is not as it appears. And you may be right. But there is no objective way to prove it "here and now". We can only "know" it on an intellectual level, without ever seeing it.
Which shouldn't stop you from keeping the search for the Truth. :-)
"Almighty then!" LOL, good one.
I've just re-watched Ace Ventura 2. Great fun.
Mr Nobody said...
"Besides, other than Heaven and Hell, and the Earth people, the universe is empty space. There are no aliens, et's and all that."
That would seem like an awful lot of wasted space wouldn't it? A huge part of it is invisible except through highly sophisticated radio-telescopes and the like, which no holy book even suggested building. Plus, how come the jewel isn't AT THE CENTRE? Earth is not even in the middle of the Milky Way. 'Tis a strange jewelcase, that puts us at the very margin of our galactic box.
Are you sure there's nothing out there? Have you gone exploring to check it out? When man just crossed the Atlantic, he found a whole new world. Quite populated...
Maybe the other intelligent life exists but hasn't contacted us for one of several reasons : the vastness of lightyears to cross (we don't even know if it is POSSIBLE to cross them), the scarcity of inhabited planets and their average distance making contact difficult, the time lag between our technologies (our own space age is a measly half-century old in 10.000 years of civilization and 100.000 years of existence as a species), the quite plausible possibility that their own industrial evolution destroyed them along with their environment before intergalactic travel, a religious belief of their own convincing them that there's nobody else to meet, the distrust toward a species which (according to our own radio and TV brodcasts) craves violence, war and injustice... Or simply their disdain for any other intelligence too primitive to have already found and conquered them. The possible explanations are endless.
One last existential interrogation I have : where exactly in the universe are Heaven and Hell located? We found hoardes of things we never expected to exist, but what we expected we haven't located yet. Quite puzzling... Why hide what we KNOW must exist (according to the Books), with all the inaccessible remote space available around?
I'm sorry, but some of your assumptions feel just too basic. ;-)
I'm certainly not claiming that the following hypothesis is correct, however ponder this : if Man was not the purpose of Creation, our over-sensitive ego would forcibly deny it by any possible means until our last day. A motivated enough egocentric could make up a whole religion, or simply rewrite the genuine one, with enough determination, conviction and perseverance to establish his truth as authentic after enough time (say, a few decades or centuries). You can very easily confirm this partly, with any of the religions you don't follow, at least concerning the bits that contradict your own beliefs. Everything and its contrary can't be correct at once.
Several people today think that the higher beings described long ago by our various religions (beginning with the many ancient divinites, perhaps), angels, demons, djinns... were in fact superiorly advanced extra-terrestrials, perceived by our superstitious ancestors as divine. I find it quite ludicrous, especially since they should have made official contact now that our society is ready for the idea of aliens. However, some religious-based beliefs like creationnism and pre-galilean cosmology are no more logical than alien "gods".
Me, the more I learn, the more I realize how much I still have to discover. So I don't make any final claims I cannot back, like "aliens don't exist" or "the cosmos is empty apart from us". Without the curiosity to learn and discover, the Church would still be telling us that the Earth is flat. And you wouldn't be using orbiting satellites to tell me your opinions via the internet.
"The universe was created by Lord Jesus"
Wasn't the Universe created by the Father? I was taught that Jesus is the persona of the Son, incarnated on Earth in human flesh. Why establish any distinction if you're going to say things like "Jesus is the Creator"? Jesus defines a man, believed to be of divine essence, who lived 2000 years ago in Palestine.
Or maybe among the things I had yet to learn, was the existence of Christians who reject the Trinity?
Studies on the scarcity of extra-terrestrial life:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rare_Earth_hypothesis
To me, the universe is full of life of any kind you can imagine. I even believe some forms are beyond or imagination.
Maybe we'll have to define life in a new way to describe all that exists out there.
We're only part of the texture of the universe.
It's not bananas and monkeys only, if you're with me.
;-)
One last existential interrogation I have : where exactly in the universe are Heaven and Hell located?
Heaven, I do not know. Hell is in the center of the Earth for now.
But one day both death and hell will be cast into the "lake of fire."
And Jesus said, "I and My Father are one." So everything was created by the Son of God who is God and will always be God, yet the son as well.
I have a question for you Pascal. How can one assume the earth is in the milky way galaxy? What rocket was launched and went billions of miles into deep space and turned around and snapped a picture of the milky way and pinpointed earth a little off to the left?
Doesn't chime Doctor.
We're only part of the texture of the universe.
We are the universe. We are alone.
One lone planet in the middle of empty black space. No aliens, no star wars, captain kirk fighting klingons, we are it.
Doesn't it make you sad to think that this is all there ever will be? Your life of 70, 80 years? There is more.
Even God cried.............."Jesus wept."
Yes, there is a heaven I believe and I will see my saviour someday when I breathe my last. I will awake in His arms and he'll wipe away all my tears.
I gladly kneel before my Lord Jesus who gave his very life for me and rose on the third day. Because I accepted Him into my heart and he cleansed my sin with His Blood.
All my success is because of Him. All that I am is because He helped me when I was chained in sin.
I don't deserve it but He freely gave it to me as a gift.
When they bury me, they will only be putting away my old rotten flesh but the real me will be in the presense of God.
Will you Eolake Stobblehouse accept Jesus Christ as your Lord and Saviour?
We are the universe. We are alone.
I can't believe this. Too much fuss for a few monkeys.
I'll know better probably in 2 or 3 more decades when I'm dead and gone. Or will I?
And who defines it as such?
God Himself. Genesis.
We merely follow it. There is no need to argue the fact. Life is in sequence. Death too.
Even the sparrows know how to feed their young and the snowbirds of the northern world know that south is warmer.
Sequence is vital, an unwritten law like gravity. It exists whether or not you chose to believe in it.
Saying goodbye is never easy, hello comes natural, but sequence is there no matter if we question it. You cannot break the law of sequence, it's impossible.
10.000 years of civilization and 100.000 years of existence as a species
Correction: 6000 years of civilization. 6000 years of human existence.
I can't believe this. Too much fuss for a few monkeys.
I'll know better probably in 2 or 3 more decades when I'm dead and gone. Or will I?
you'll know m beep the moment sir when you take your last breath. what's the fixation with monkies? that lie was exposed centuries ago if i understand what you are obsessing over?
are you willing to risk everything over monkies? i'm not. monkies are just monkies.they have no souls like us. consider your soul.
don't you fear be seperated from all light and hope for ever? i like you m beep, may the Holy spirit guide you into the truth. I care about your soul my friend I'll never meet.
I don't want to see you being dragged off into the pits of darkness begging and screaming for another chance. I love you but not like our Lord Jesus does.
Consider what you risk my dear friend.
Will you Eolake Stobblehouse accept Jesus Christ as your Lord and Saviour?
I too want to know this answer? What shall you do with the man called "CHRIST?"
No matter how you react to this question I will have my answer.
anonymous said,
"We are the universe. We are alone.
One lone planet in the middle of empty black space. No aliens, no star wars, captain kirk fighting klingons, we are it."
anonymous, can I give you a hug?
lol, no, just kidding. I know you're not into that mushy stuff.
hey, where do you live? There's a local diner known for their lemon meringue pie and cheesy juke box. What do you say? I'm not doing anything today.
Laurie
the whole question re. "I am in control" presupposes a solid, separate "I". The deeper question is not, "Am I or am I not in control?" but "What am I?"
This question is like wildfire, handle with care.
I accept Jesus as one of the greatest teachers ever of forgiveness, tolerance, and turning the other cheek.
The greatest lesson he taught us all was to never judge others. I am working hard on getting better and better at that.
Mr Nobody said...
"How can one assume the earth is in the milky way galaxy?"
I give free astronomy classes on my spare time. You can have a very precise answer in about 8 months, for the very reasonable fee of $399.90
Or you could study it in college.
How does one see by himself the atomic nucleus, discovered through Sir Ernest Rutherford's 1911 experiment, or the charge of the electron, measured by Robert Millikan's capacitor experiment in 1921?
If you want to question every established fact of every scientific discipline, you have a long and fruitful learning career ahead of you.
However, I can give you a short version for free, regarding the place of Earth in the Galaxy. Wait for nightfall in a place far from city lights, and look up. The Milky Way is that very distinctive streak of concentrated stars, similar to a trail of milk droplets. (Hence the name Galaxy, from the greek Galaktos=milk) It is only in one line, because we see it practically from its border, and there are much less stars in all other directions.
If we were in the middle, like with a forest, there would be equivalent lots to see in all directions.
The rest of the details of the Cosmos were established by observing it with advanced and powerful telescopes, and the likes. Professionals can tell you with absolute certainty at what distance everything detectable is located, what direction and at what speed it is moving, as reliably as a military radar follows an aircraft. Just like you know your mom's calling you from the end of the garden just by looking outside your window, even if you KNOW you'll never get up and walk that far.
Thank you for your attention, and be sure to tell your friends about how good a private tutor I am. :-)
dean said...
"Yes, there is a heaven I believe"
Amen. I'm sure you're sincere, and I think you are right. However, if you could whip up a set of coordinates for the Hubble space telescope and tell me: "Look right over there, this is where Heaven is", you could potentially become richer than Bill Gates and the Sultan of Brunei put together.
"The chief problem about death, incidentally, is the fear that there may be no afterlife -- a depressing thought, particularly for those who have bothered to shave. Also, there is the fear that there is an afterlife but no one will know where it's being held." -- Woody Allen
Up to this day, faith relies solely on intimate personal conviction, not on any kind of irrefutable proof. Which is why no religion has universally converted all educated and scientific people (or a satisfying majority).
"If only God would give me some clear sign! Like making a large deposit in my name in a Swiss bank. " -- Woody Allen again
Monsieur Beep said...
"I'll know better probably in 2 or 3 more decades when I'm dead and gone. Or will I?"
Do try and come back to tell us, please. There are some of us who'd LOVE to know for sure.
Thank you in advance. 0:-)
(That's an angel emoticon.^)
guilty by association said...
"Life is in sequence. Death too."
"Time is nature's way of keeping everything from happening at once." (I have a whole page of them!)
Anonymous said...
"Correction: 6000 years of civilization. 6000 years of human existence."
Look, friend, this is getting tedious. Must I ALSO explain how objective science established the oldest Homo sapiens fossils 1.000 centuries ago, and how sedentary human societies had been proven to be more than 10.000 years ancient?
6.000 years is the age of the invention of WRITING. Which defines the transition between pre-history and History. If you think there was nothing before that, like Jehovah's Witnesses claim, go to school and do try to pay attention to the teacher. Dinosaurs, Coelacanths, sharks, scorpions, ants, termites, Cro-Magnon, Neanderthal, Ramapithecus... if you don't accept the evidence of fossils, you should immediately discard scientific police investigation, and all use of oil. (Petroleum is also a fossil by-product of very old forests, from the Carboniferous era.)
The proof is there for all objective minds to see. You're free to cover your eyes, but don't sing too loud, you're disturbing the digging teams and they're paid by the hour.
dean said...
"what's the fixation with monkies? that lie was exposed centuries ago"
Um... Monkeys is the correct orthograph, there's a vowel before the "Y". And the adequate word is "apes".
Actually, it's more of an imprecision that was corrected. Apes are not really our ancestors. They are our closest relatives from a common ancestor. Again, fossils haven't just been made up by enemies of the Gospel. The genetic code is identical for all living creatures : viruses, bacteriae, plants, animals, mushrooms... making all genes freely transposable. There are transgenic mice today that glow with the same cold green light as a jellyfish. The embryo develops following the same patterns, to the point that a human foetus has a tail, which later stops growing and becomes the vestigial coccyx right behind our anus. While our ears still have 4 vestigial muscles that on occasion make them move.
dean said...
"monkies are just monkies.they have no souls like us."
From a world-famous song:
"But I know every rock and tree and creature
Has a life, has a spirit, has a name"
All Creation stems from God, doesn't it? Also known fondly as "The GreatSpirit". The animal, vegetal, and even mineral kingdoms have a sort of life of their own. Life implies soul. Ours is definitely specific and unique. But not the only kind in existence. I remember, in the Middle Ages, when animals were quite often brought to court by the ecclesial authorities.
"I don't want to see you being dragged off into the pits of darkness begging and screaming for another chance."
Buy defenition and according to the christian-defined standards of God, one is free to believe or to doubt. There would be no merit otherwise. And remember that the billions of people raised in a different religion will, for the most part, stick to it all their life. So things appear less obvious than you feel yourself, making tolerance a mandatory principle of sense.
"To you I'm an atheist; to God, I'm the Loyal Opposition." -- W.A.
Eolake said...
"I accept Jesus as one of the greatest teachers ever of forgiveness, tolerance, and turning the other cheek.
The greatest lesson he taught us all was to never judge others."
Aye! I second that. May I add "charity", "kindness", "solidarity"? I wasn't convinced by the allegation that he was God-born, but from the transcendant wisdom and humanity of his preachings. The rest is secondary.
"Love thy brother, who is before you, before you can love God, whom you cannot see." (I can't find the reference, but I read that in th Gospel.)
I also read this : "Blessed is he who does my Father's will without having received the Revelation." God's will is not that we do good out of fear from going to Hell, or to earn Heaven. Ideally, it should arise spontaneously from our hearts, in a self-sufficient altruistic motivation. The true spirit of love is not based on some kind of barter, otherwise it would ultimately be worthless. There is no merit in "just following orders".
My father today is old. I still listen to him. Not because he could give me a good spanking. Not because of life-long habit. Simply, because I love and respect him. Freely.
I do believe fully that Jesus rocks. Not because he's "the CEO's son". Because he's a swell guy, period. This is how I pick my friends. He taught me that, by walking among the lepers, helping the prostitutes and showing compassion to heathens and believers alike.
A friendly universe? I have the power to help make it so. Whatever their belief, my fellow humans are my brothers. No matter how they pray, I look at how they live.
Amen. (Hebraic word meaning "So be it".)
Post a Comment