The existing reality is determined by names. We learn about names and physical reality in our family, school, with our friends, or even on the street.
But what about ideas, and names of non-physical reality? Are there pure names, those purely describe the non-physical objects?
There are many ideas in the world about ideas such as truth, right, religion, god, destruction, world, life, those are described on as much possible ways as the number of people who use these words. This makes the world so colored and interesting, but it also hides a great danger of misunderstanding, therefore discussions and debates.
If we put a flower, for example, a red rose onto a table and ask two people sitting near the table, to describe the thing they see, they will describe it not only from the point where they sit at the moment of discussion, but their expression would be determined by their knowledge, culture, approach, experience, language as well.
If we would ask both of them to describe that object to a third one who did not see it, there would be a slightly noticeable difference between the description got from the two interviewed, that may result the third person to add his/her own knowledge, culture, approach and experience to understand the description or – in worse case – the description may result a misunderstanding, a feeling that the two describers are not speaking about the same thing. And then a never ending discussion, debate might start that could have been stopped by giving up of one participant's approach or by showing the rose to every people involved for their own personal experience.
Even if we let both of the describers to go around the table, look at the red rose from every possible aspect, the description of the object would be determined by the interviewed person as a person (identity).
Therefore whenever we are speaking about non-physical reality we have a strong approach to these words that is determined by much human individualism (including personal emotionality, reasonability, education etc).
Human individualism brings in itself all the colors, the differences and uniquements those are the most valuable powers of the life.
All our words about non-physical present are a great adventure to us, but the danger of misunderstanding is always behind the corner, with the possible result of division of worlds. Even in such organizations which are dealing with these ideas on a daily level the idea of a world is commonly described and determined by the name of the organization.
As how the world is not finished, we have to realize that we won’t finish it and we won’t finish building ideas as well, although the times we live in, hurry us to finish our duties.
Let’s see the word human rights. We are talking of human rights of women, children, elderly people, minorities, disabled persons – aren’t they the same? The same rights for everybody? Or we are talking about the rights of packed up people?
The ideas are like the physical reality, like a tree: suddenly they begin to grow and we see only one aspect of it. The tree won’t change, but those, who are looking at it, will describe it depending on their individualism. Later the tree becomes forgotten (it dies) and what stays is our approach to that tree. If we accept that the tree exists (existed) independently of us we would show much more appreciation both to the physical and non-physical reality.
Some may ask, if everything exists independently of us, what is our duty, where do we stand? Is there any meaning of us? Basically this question hides our fear of being forgotten, of our death. But by being alive only just for second changes the world, we have to be aware of the fact that we are changing world and adding to it simply because of our being, our existence. Everything around us has a meaning: even something that hurts, disgusts us adds something to us: opens eyes or our hearts… On a positive or a negative way… that is again not as dependent of the environment as dependent on the human individualism.
As our individualism is our treasure, the individualism of the life around us (existence of physical and non-physical reality) is also a treasure, our existence should be to feel, accept and not hurt our and other’s individualism.
So when we talk about ideas, let’s not forget that we are always talking about the same thing but from different approaches, therefore the only aim should be not to describe completely the idea but to add something new. And every individualism adds something to the ideas.
The visions at one point are same to everybody, our beliefs, approaches and determines us, our names are only given to us to know how to address us and not to put our names or ourselves onto the pedestals of the history.
But what about ideas, and names of non-physical reality? Are there pure names, those purely describe the non-physical objects?
There are many ideas in the world about ideas such as truth, right, religion, god, destruction, world, life, those are described on as much possible ways as the number of people who use these words. This makes the world so colored and interesting, but it also hides a great danger of misunderstanding, therefore discussions and debates.
If we put a flower, for example, a red rose onto a table and ask two people sitting near the table, to describe the thing they see, they will describe it not only from the point where they sit at the moment of discussion, but their expression would be determined by their knowledge, culture, approach, experience, language as well.
If we would ask both of them to describe that object to a third one who did not see it, there would be a slightly noticeable difference between the description got from the two interviewed, that may result the third person to add his/her own knowledge, culture, approach and experience to understand the description or – in worse case – the description may result a misunderstanding, a feeling that the two describers are not speaking about the same thing. And then a never ending discussion, debate might start that could have been stopped by giving up of one participant's approach or by showing the rose to every people involved for their own personal experience.
Even if we let both of the describers to go around the table, look at the red rose from every possible aspect, the description of the object would be determined by the interviewed person as a person (identity).
Therefore whenever we are speaking about non-physical reality we have a strong approach to these words that is determined by much human individualism (including personal emotionality, reasonability, education etc).
Human individualism brings in itself all the colors, the differences and uniquements those are the most valuable powers of the life.
All our words about non-physical present are a great adventure to us, but the danger of misunderstanding is always behind the corner, with the possible result of division of worlds. Even in such organizations which are dealing with these ideas on a daily level the idea of a world is commonly described and determined by the name of the organization.
As how the world is not finished, we have to realize that we won’t finish it and we won’t finish building ideas as well, although the times we live in, hurry us to finish our duties.
Let’s see the word human rights. We are talking of human rights of women, children, elderly people, minorities, disabled persons – aren’t they the same? The same rights for everybody? Or we are talking about the rights of packed up people?
The ideas are like the physical reality, like a tree: suddenly they begin to grow and we see only one aspect of it. The tree won’t change, but those, who are looking at it, will describe it depending on their individualism. Later the tree becomes forgotten (it dies) and what stays is our approach to that tree. If we accept that the tree exists (existed) independently of us we would show much more appreciation both to the physical and non-physical reality.
Some may ask, if everything exists independently of us, what is our duty, where do we stand? Is there any meaning of us? Basically this question hides our fear of being forgotten, of our death. But by being alive only just for second changes the world, we have to be aware of the fact that we are changing world and adding to it simply because of our being, our existence. Everything around us has a meaning: even something that hurts, disgusts us adds something to us: opens eyes or our hearts… On a positive or a negative way… that is again not as dependent of the environment as dependent on the human individualism.
As our individualism is our treasure, the individualism of the life around us (existence of physical and non-physical reality) is also a treasure, our existence should be to feel, accept and not hurt our and other’s individualism.
So when we talk about ideas, let’s not forget that we are always talking about the same thing but from different approaches, therefore the only aim should be not to describe completely the idea but to add something new. And every individualism adds something to the ideas.
The visions at one point are same to everybody, our beliefs, approaches and determines us, our names are only given to us to know how to address us and not to put our names or ourselves onto the pedestals of the history.
Nincsenek megjegyzések:
Megjegyzés küldése