l. Can you tell us some things No One thinks everyone should know?
What is most important is difficult to put into words. The establishment of facts, even quite abstract facts, is much easier. For instance, the Higgs boson was recently discovered at CERN because particles into which it disintegrated became manifest at the energy level predicted. Scientists review the data, and if they all come to the same conclusion, one asserts that it has been proven--albeit indirectly--that the boson exists, and that's that. (Even in cases where science is almost certain that, say, X is a fact, if new data are found that indicate otherwise, X can be replaced by Y. The scientific method is simple, and it works exceptionally well for facts about nature.)
2. Not so well regarding human nature, I presume?
Niels Bohr, a seminal figure in the development of quantum physics, thought that the new branch of science he helped develop was, albeit extremely complex, quite simple in comparison to consciousness. He was convinced that consciousness will never be completely understood. Many scientists today agree with him. From the mysteries of consciousness paradoxes arise. Are we merely matter? After all, all the elements in the human body are present in nature, albeit in very different concentrations. Yet we are convinced that we are more than matter. Only a madman could believe that his daughter is merely a piece of meat.
3. Perhaps that conviction stems from a Darwinian compulsion to pass on one's genes?
That is undoubtedly very important. But does it explain everything? Who really knows? One must live with the possibility that two opposing views can each be true. In Newtonian science, which describes our everyday world, such paradoxes do not occur; they do however occur in quantum physics. No One knows that a photon sometimes behaves like a particle and sometimes like a wave. No One thinks it is fascinating that reality on the simplest level--quantum physics--and reality at the most complex level we know, human consciousness, cannot be pinned down. Between them lies a world which is much easier to understand.
4. Can you give further examples of ambiguity?
Everything that human beings create, and everything that describes the way we think about ourselves are open to interpretation, sometimes radically different interpretations. Once again, this is not true of science once a hypothesis has been confirmed by data. But paradox and ambiguity are very much applicable to our inner lives. For instance, a history of colonial America would have been quite different if a Native American was the author instead of a Puritan. When No One was a boy, Columbus was celebrated as one of the first great heroes of the New World; today his legacy is contested. Other examples: does free will exist? Some philosophers assert that it does. Are human actions completely determined by the interaction of genetics and environment? Some philosophers assert this. Do free will and determinism somehow coexist? Some philosophers assert that this is so. Who really knows? No One.
5. What about the things we create?
Thank you for the opportunity to elaborate! In the arts, tastes change, and nothing can be proven. I will give you some examples. In Bach's day, Telemann was much more critically acclaimed than Bach, who is now widely considered to be the best composer who ever lived. When Michael Jackson died, No One heard a critic assert that he was the best musician since Mozart, No One, who much admires Jackson, thought this assertion was ridiculous, but can No One prove it?
6. Are you ready for the question? What about God?
No One does not consider that the question at all.
7. What then is the ultimate question for us?
There are several, and they all have to do with consciousness and its (ambiguous) perceptions of the world. Since Kant we know all knowledge arises from sense perceptions. We can thus never have ultimate knowledge of anything; it is highly likely that beings exist in the cosmos that have evolved with a different neurological constitution and thus see things differently. Even science does not provide absolute knowledge--who can assert with certainly that the facts of science transcend the human mind?
8. Isn't that the age-old question of whether a sound exits when a tree falls and no one is around to hear it?
You confused me when you said "no one"--I thought you were referring to me! Actually that is a meaningless question. One may assert that vibrations in the air occur when a tree falls when nobody is there, but there is no sound. Sound is how a brain perceives vibrations of certain frequencies; without a brain there is no sound. The same is true for other perceptions. Music sometimes results in a feeling of awe in those who are sensitive to it--and No One counts himself among them--but even the queen of the arts is not independent of mind. A galaxy might resonate at a frequency that is a harmonic of B flat--way below middle C, of course--but it doesn't have any pitch if there is no ear to hear it. Colors do not exist beyond brains that perceive them; many animals "know" only black and white, and some don't even perceive that.
9. We're almost at the end of the interview, so let me cut to the chase. I repeat, what is the ultimate question?
It's basically this: what is our nature and how should we live our lives? Although No One assumes--without proof, of course--the unity of human nature, for analysis it is best described in two ways. First, the Darwinian aspect--self-assertion and the will to survive. Second, the transcendent aspects, love and wisdom. (Remember, when No One refers to transcendence, No One is indicating an inner experience, not something that comes from the outside.)
10. I must return to what many believe to be the most important question of all. What about God?
When we look inside, sometimes we seem to hear an inner voice; sometimes it all seems very impersonal. No One is therefore supportive of those who use the term God for one's conscience at the highest level; No One is also supportive of those who use impersonal terms, such as Nirvana. No One vigorously asserts, however, that just like music and colors, God exists within; it is highly doubtful that there will ever be evidence of God or of gods existing beyond consciousness. Before the age of science, it was possible to believe in God both as a symbol and as a fact. It is no longer possible, however, for an educated twenty-first century mind to believe that dogmas--pick any one you choose--are as factual as two and two equal four. Self and God exist together; once self is completely transcended--this is theoretically possible, but whether this has ever been achieved is open to interpretation--things would look very different: both God and the self would no longer exist, as it were. Another way of saying this is that everything becomes God, but that's just another figure of speech for something ineffable.
11. Another way of describing that state is that everyone becomes No One?
We agreed to ten questions. For the time being, No One has had enough.
No comments:
Post a Comment