Tuesday, June 13, 2006

The Inquiring Mind

Many people think they know something because they’ve always done what somebody else has told them to do -- as though the other really knew; it may be about law, medicine, politics, moral and even intensely personal matters -- as though those they obey had carte blanche authority over those matters and knowledge -- and not that those at the cutting edge of understanding fully acknowledge, that what they know or think they know, is the best they’ve come up with so far -- and seems to explain most things satisfactorily, but their knowledge (information) is imperfect. So one is seeking the best among the many alternative explanations -- and choosing what makes the best sense to them.

While the generalization may seem true and plausible, when one takes the understanding to the extremes of rigorous testing and examination, it is often revealed that what was widely believed to be true at that time, it turned out, was not -- and those realizations changed the course of one’s life, and on a larger scale, history and progress, as when a few tested whether all that could be seen, was all there was in the world. That was what all the "authorities" of their time agreed upon as the truth -- and in past times, those who would not agree, could be burned at the stake or tortured until they agreed to accept the authority of the self-appointed few.

There are still such impulses in 21st century mainstream culture -- with the added complication of those intermediaries who further interpret the “truth, according to their biases (or limited understanding) -- because these intermediaries are insistent that they have to filter the truth, and not that they need to get out of the way, and let the message be transmitted intact. Such intermediaries are in the habit of selecting parts of an understanding to suit their own arbitrary tastes -- instead of allowing the author’s original observation to go through undistorted. Invariably, one selects only those snippets of plausibility that supports what they already know, and omits everything that might be a challenge to their old perspective -- and so nothing new can ever come to light.

History, they will insist, only repeats itself -- and not that it is always evolving and progressing; yet they will fancy themselves as “progressives,” because that sounds a whole lot more impressive than, “retarded.” Their capacity for self-deception and self-delusion are unlimited in this way. In their minds, they are always winning the imaginary wars and competitions they have against everybody else -- as the supreme intelligence in the universe.

That was the epitome of the early 20th century personality -- raised in the Depression and never having escaped that mentality/experience. Some did though, proving it was entirely possible to overcome such conditioning in hardship.

But the qualities that might have conveyed survival value under those conditions, may be distinct disadvantages in different realities and possibilities. What is appropriate for one set of conditions may be entirely dysfunctional under another. The inquiring mind seeks to find out if what it thinks to be true is actually in fact true -- rather than merely imposing his knowledge on those he thinks may not have heard of what he thinks is all there is to know.

5 Comments:

At June 15, 2006 2:18 PM, Blogger Mike Hu said...

Part of the reason I write, is to have something thoughtful to read, if I can't find it anywhere else. And that is the reason I frequently comment on my own theme fo that week. Because what is lacking in popular culture is not breadth but depth -- and very few can go deeper, and why their original piece is all there is to say for them on that matter -- and then they flit to the next distraction, the next entertainment for the day, which in the past was largely determined by the mainstream (mass) media.

That's why they pretty nearly all write about the same thing (theme) for that day, and if it catches the public's mood and fancy, they run with it until everybody has had their say and the attention is exhausted and spent.

For nearly all of mankind's existence, that message was the next great calamity to wipe us all out -- which should be a matter of concern, if it is an actual urgency, unlike so many that are merely fabricated now, to maintain jobs and keep people entertained.

I don't think the lack in contemporary society is the lack of entertainment and diversions. It is the lack of depth -- of meaning and purpose -- which many people of traditional success are beginning to realize is the next step in their personal evolution.

The traditional manner of thinking is focued about money mainly -- and tangentially about health, happiness and well-being, which are the bottom line. That is the life force that will sustain one far beyond the physical and social props.

That is the extension of life that was not possible before because most people died before reaching that stage of life. But when it is the dominant new reality for increasingly many who haven't had that possibility previously, it obviously is a life that must be created.

Just repeating every other day like everyday before is not the life force and focus that growth, evolution, and progress is. Otherwise , there is merely trying to ward off the deterioration until finally death overcomes.

So this new science, this new knowledge, is unprecedented, being created as we do and are -- of it can be life in the familiar old pattern of deterioration. What is the intelligent choice?

 
At June 15, 2006 4:02 PM, Blogger Mike Hu said...

In the last century, being able to retire was the objective for many. Then it became being able to retire comforatably. Then lavishly.

So the retirement planners merely upped the goals further until the orginal intent and purpose was lost. So now we have generation of people who feel an "entitlement" to travel around the world as much as they like, anytime they want, eat the best and all they want, etc., without end. Obviously, more is not the answer when "enough" is achieved.

Knowing when "enough" is enough, is the intelligent mind -- and not those, who no matter how much they have, demand "more" as their sole meaning and purpose of their lives.

 
At June 15, 2006 10:43 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'll give you an example of a fellow blogger ( who I imagine you've run across in the past 15 years) - and who does a much, much better job of conveying his philosophy.

Are you without the capacity to learn how to communicate?


http://www.arthurdevany.com/

Jim

 
At June 15, 2006 11:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

And don't be Disingenious to your readers: as noted previously, this blog is a (karl rove-type) "trial balloon",

you're not expecting nor prepared for a fight here.

 
At June 16, 2006 12:26 AM, Blogger Mike Hu said...

You're right, this is not a Democrat site -- in which the purpose is to argue and prove who is right and politically, morally correct and superior.

So if you find a site and advisors you like, enjoy them -- and let other people find their own truth too.

That's what life is all about. Improsing your truth on everybody else in the world is the evil and violence in the world.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home