(PS: It should be noted that the post contains coarse language.)
If you do observe the real world, and compare it to the ideal image we want it to be, you would notice the huge difference between the two. There exists a gigantic gap between thoughts and practice. And reasons for that vary. Sometimes, it is just that our thoughts are fictitious and relate not to any form of reality. Other times, our thoughts are amply practical, but not compatible when translated.
Take for example these two thoughts (theories): Gravitational waves, and the Higgs boson. The existence of both was suspected, the former in 1916, the latter in 1964. After fifty years, the Higgs boson was discovered after constructing one of the world’s most expensive and complex experimental facilities, CERN’s Large Hadron Collider. It took double that time period for gravitational waves to be detected. That is only the gap between theoretical and experimental physics.
We have other forms of science that also have theoretical and experimental side, with an unfilled void in between. After cumbersome process of collecting data, and drawing conclusions, theories are formed. Theories must general, parsimonious, falsifiable, and provide ideas for the future. And each theory, of any science, must go through the process of falsifying. You keep bombarding the theory of all kinds of suspicions, conundrums, stalemates, eerie exceptions, until it falls. If it did not, the theory gains credibility. If you want to advertise for a helmet, you test in public with blows from swords. You do not put it on display and start poetizing about its strength. This is the scientific method, which should be the first verse in sacred scriptures of all religions. (Probably it would break religions themselves) And that method is the only logical process that would slightly keep us away from falling into fiction. Science is the study of reality. And the core of science is experiment. Actually, the core of human knowledge is experiment. So, since every science can have a philosophical approach, why cannot our own, individual, personal thoughts have an experimental side? It surely can. The trouble is which conduct? The aim of this draft is to address and tackle that barrier between what we believe and how we behave. We do not behave according to what we believe. Do not believe me?
Use the scientific method to falsify my claim. First, make observations. Dwell upon yourself. What belief do you embrace? Are you an agnostic? Nihilist? Believer? Atheist? Optimist? Pessimist? Anarchist? Existentialist? Feminist? Now ask yourself, as an act of falsifying, why do you believe in what you believe? Are you really driven by your belief, or you succumb to reality? Have you ever encountered a situation during your life that made no sense through the lenses of what you believe in?
Let me take myself as an example. I am a nihilist. I believe that whatever the fuck you think about life, it remains meaningless, pointless, wasteful, and living it is mere absurdity. And soon, you will die, you will forgotten, and more sooner, what you left behind will be long lost in nothingness, and make your existence like it did not happen. I strongly believe in that. Do I act accordingly regardless of the fact that my belief is justifiable? No Am I driven by it? Rarely am, and mostly I am driven by social norms. Have I encountered a situation that contradicted it? Yes. I have been in love, and love opposes nihilism. So, why is this? Why what I believe in is not compatible with reality, and there is always a contradictory loophole? Why there is that gap between reality and my personal fiction? That I can speculate about. Reality is disappointing. We establish rules, and make fictitious worlds arise within ourselves, in order to make sense of the world around us. We fail horribly trying to make sense of some parts of life sometimes, but that can be sacrificed, since what remains is sufficient as a shelter. Our beliefs, in general, are a reaction we form as a defense mechanism to the cruelty of life. Partially, they are formed upon logical reasoning. But we do not give it the proper falsification. As long as it comforts us, why bother taking away that comfort? And that is why that gap exists.
It seems that every philosophical approach towards life fails to make sense of some parts of it. Either that the approach itself has not been thoroughly constructed due to lack of data and experience, or that it is just a failure. But, giving all this time since the conscious human erupted to existence, weren’t we able to unite effort and find that one, consistent philosophy towards life, knowledge, and existence in general? Or is it just that we are erroneous, and imperfect by nature? Why the theory of everything of this particular subject does seems so farfetched?
If we are unable to unite effort, and that perfect philosophical pry is unreachable, and in consequence, we settled for our flawed brainy outcomes, why being so violent in defending it? You can still keep your flawed belief, enjoy the comfort it delivers, while accepting other beliefs. Whatever you believe in, I guarantee that it can simply put to ruin by your rivals. For that if diligent enough, they can bring forth the fiction it possesses, and fiction will always oppose reality. A time will certainly arrive and you will defy your belief. Simply because the virus of fiction found a hospitable corner. You will act against your doctrine, and be familiar with its fragility. And that is completely okay, as you long as you do not rub your penis of beliefs against other people’s faces, because that is the trouble we are facing in the real world.
As long as humans do not realize the bullshit side of what they believe in, they will grow pride, sense of belongingness, and prejudice. And, when opposed, instead of revealing the consistency of their approach to gain approvals, they defend the bullshit. You do not defend bullshit. Defend bullshit, you receive more bullshit. Remember the helmet? And also, when not opposed, they grow arrogant. And in consequence, they endeavor to translate their belief to the real world. And since they do not realize the gap between their belief and reality, they translate everything. And here comes the major predicament we face daily: reality shock.
Since none of our beliefs is compatible with reality, and since we are not aware of that, what good could come from putting them into practice? Nothing. Every person from every belief is doing the same thing. These beliefs have different pillars of valid parts, let alone the bullshit side. So we fall into a stalemate. We receive overwhelming messages of incompatibility, existence of bugs, invalid inputs, and errors of syntax. What do you do when your code isn’t translated properly every compiling? You break the fucking process and troubleshoot errors. Humans do not do that in the real world. Despite the fact that they saw the bullshit in what they believe, and despite of the incompatibility, they do not reconcile with the failure, nor do they troubleshoot in secrecy. They defend the bullshit. Imagine after stealing a code from the internet, you compile it, and the compiler sends you a feedback of what is wrong with the code. You do not troubleshoot, you keep pressing F5, compiling again and again, and you start losing your shit because the compiler have no respect for the code that you had no hand in writing? That is the case with humans and their beliefs. They brainwash those little fuckeries they brought to existence with loads of false claims, and those little fuckers grow old to be like their imbecile parents, spreading holy bullshit in fervency and excitement. No wonder humans are fucking each other for no good.
But contemplate a little. What the world would be if we spread the scientific method same as we spread bullshit? What would a child grows to be if he wasn’t indoctrinated, by force, into the beliefs of his parents and society? What would people behave like if they realized how flawed their beliefs are? How real our beliefs would be? Or will they remain fictitious nonetheless?...
Comment and share this with your friends.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete