Not long ago I wanted to share all my impressions and findings with the world. After all, knowledge is useless if not shared.
As time passed by, I started to realise that it was a terrible waste of time. No one really cares what you have to say. Seems obvious now, but because I do care about sharing valuable ideas and knowledge, regardless of the person who expresses them, I just assumed others will do too. I know many individuals will argue that they do, but who they choose to listen to is often guided by their own self-esteem. They wouldn’t listen to a beggar in the street, but they would to a famous business man. Even though the beggar may be more honest in his life lessons than the business man who often spins a nice semi-fake story. Without a strong social position, your ideas are nothing.

So I will not be writing much from here on.

But I would like to share one last thing: the fundamentals of my logic and actions which give meaning to my existence.

I know my life, just like everyone else’s, is a bleep in the never ending darkness of space and time, a spark preceded and followed by infinity. And in the face of infinity, almost everything is meaningless: our homes, our cars, our fame, our lives, hopes and dreams.

Yet we give so much value to these small things in so far that people sell their organs for a new phone. It’s funny how, once we go beyond basic necessities, once we free ourselves from our struggle to survive, we find ourselves empty and aimless. For a time religion filled in this emptiness. But with religion withering away, our egos stepped in and set value to all these materialistic things in an attempt to give meaning to an otherwise meaningless life. We chase nothing but phantasms of our own mind.

Yet, as I wrote earlier, there is a dim, almost impossible hope that in the face of infinity, we may still find meaning to our existence. That’s because as individuals we may fade away and die, but as a collective we endure. Just pick up a book by Plato and read some passage, as you do his thoughts echo in your mind across millennia.  “Speak my name and I will live.” as an ancient Egyptian papyrus wrote.

Our collective knowledge, spirit, ideas and desire transcend the barriers of space and time and through it, our small, insignificant lives suddenly gain some meaning. We as individuals may die, but our thoughts and our genes live on in our collective consciousness. One can only hope that one day our distant offerings will reach the end of the universe and beyond and through them, we will too.

It is said we come with nothing in this world and leave with nothing, but in between we shape it and are shaped by it. If  there is any chance for our lives to have any meaning, however insignificant, we should make sure that those who follow us can pursue their path towards a bigger and brighter future. Our kindness will inspire them, our harshness will make them stronger, our greed and selfishness will chain them to the ground.

I choose to work towards that future and from that follow all my actions and attitudes.

I hope one day I will not be alone on this. That others would have figured it out and together we will all go to the end of the universe.

Advertisements

It is pointless to hide my pessimistic view of the world, a view that took shape in time and it’s very hard to shake away – too many compromises, too many mistakes, too many unfulfilled dreams, too much reality.
Normally I should give up on everything and throw myself off a bridge, but despite all this, I keep soldiering on, sustained not by the hope of success, but by the feeling of responsibility; responsibility for the world that made me. I am part of the world I live in (all of it, from family to galaxies); I am made by it, shaped by it – and in a larger sense – a manifestation of it. I exist because “it” deems that I should exist and thus, in turn I work for it – in a loose sense I could say I feel responsible for making a “better world”. From another perspective, I could argue that if the purpose of my life is meaningless then my existence must be pointless, but if that was true then I wouldn’t exist – since nothing exists by chance, it’s all caused by something (see theoretical physics).  Thus, if I am here then there’s must be a point to all this, unless of course the universe is one big joke, which may very well be.
Thus, I keep rolling on thinking that one day, the world that made me will require me to give something back, here’s to  “hoping an inch of good is worth a pound of years” (Ray Bradbury).

Image

I cannot help to think that something is terribly wrong with our world. I cannot pin-point it, I cannot say for certain what it is, but it is there, like a splinter in my mind which gives no rest.

I know for certain that this feeling is not something which is specific to myself, but it is something shared by many people.

The difference is that for each us it manifests in a different way. We feel something is wrong and we try to blame it on something, like the stupidity of others, or the government, or the capitalist system, or inequality, or whatever else you can think of… but never ourselves.

Remarkably, all these issues we try to blame are social in nature, and far-reaching, indicating some sort of social connection between ourselves, our problems and our social world. Yet this is somewhat puzzling in a world where each of us thinks in a highly individualistic fashion. Basically, what happens to others shouldn’t affect us. Problem is, this works both ways, if we don’t care about others, then so will others not care about us.

My impression is that somehow we have lost ourselves along the way to modernity, we no longer identify with anything and we try to fill in that void with all sort of issues which, in our view are of concern for everyone. Basically we want to do something that matters and it is noticeable. We search for these issues which are social in nature because we want to be part of something larger, something that gives meaning to what we do. I am fairly certain that while this will patch up our need for social importance and consequently for identity (since our identity is constructed in relation to others) , it will not solve it. We are still making a mess of our planet, we are still trying to live on the back of others without even realising it, and we are stuck with the same social and political issues for decades. We may solve one or two minor problems with our social activism but the big issues are still there, pressing on us, while the average less-social-minded individual dreams of getting a well-paid job and a fancy car. Unfortunately, the more we dream of these material things, the less common they will become since they will not solve our real problems and not make our world better, in fact they lead to the opposite result.

Part of this problem is also because for many years the need for social identification and meaning was filled by religion, but with religion adapting or disappearing in our modern society, now there is a void that needs to be filled with something.

While I cannot give a clear argument for why our modern society has somehow stripped us of ourselves, (in short) my impression is that our modern way of life is at odds with what we are supposed to do; with our fundamental thoughts, feelings or instincts. Maybe the world we create is not compatible with the world we are made to live in. Sometimes, what we think is better, is not necessarily what is better. Maybe this is the splinter that we feel but cannot understand. In in the end, it’s easier to bury our heads in small things that give short-term pleasure, just like a chubby girl eating chocolate when she is upset because her friends told her she is fat, instead of facing the harsh reality.

Time will tell if what we do today is right or wrong. As evolution will continue to shape us both physically and socially, the social systems and personal philosophies that are inefficient will die out. If our world fails, there will be others to take its place. My only concern is that we could have achieved so much and yet we achieved so little.

The funny bit is that, we are not even certain any more who this “we” I just mentioned is. Our problems may run deeper than anyone can imagine.

Image

There is a long lasting debate in philosophy which reverberates throughout social sciences and can be found at the root at many on-going theoretical debates. I am referring here to the idea that we can never truly know the world as it is.

The problem goes like this: Everything we know or we think we know is known through our sense. However, what we sense is not exactly something real, it is rather a set of electrical signals that travel through our brain based more or less on some external stimuli. Therefore what we believe we see, hear or feel is not necessary what exists in reality, it is rather what our brain makes of it. Thus, what we believe is reality is in fact what we imagine it to be. As a result, we never truly know “reality” and we cannot perceive the world with a 100% objectivity.

This creates a back-door in the way we conceive the world and ourselves through which it can be argued that in fact we do not know anything and the world is the illusion of the mind, a lucid dream. The only thing that remains certain in all this line of argument is “I think, therefore I am!”. This is because, in order for me to question things, I have to exist in the first place. The very fact that I can question my-self proves that something exists, that I exist (have no idea about the rest). I may not exist in the way I see myself, I may be a computer program, I may be an illusion, I may be a ghost, but regardless of this “I am” because I think of these things.

So what’s the point of all this? The point is exactly asking this question! In truth it does not really matter how or what we think of the world, because in the end we still have to do the same things in order to exist. One can try to challenge them, but may  very well end up losing the only  certainty that is known to him or her – the certainty of his/hers existence.

Throughout the past few years I have constantly found myself in conflict with the self-centered, present-focused attitude that dominates our society. It is pointless to discuss the divide between the individual and society, between private and public, between agent and structure, between liberalism and utilitarianism which all fundamentally deal with the same problem: Which matters more, the individual or the group as a whole? The obvious answer is both, but the less obvious answer is in what way.

Regardless, this is not what I wanted to discuss. Rather the issue that I wanted to discuss is the lack of perspective in modern day people (in developed countries). By perspective I mean a wider conceptualisation of the world in terms of time. Most of us strive towards short-term benefits like having a nice car, a successful career, social recognition or in less fortunate cases, towards having cloths and food for the next few days. While for some this perspective exists because social and material constraints force the adoption of such a view, there is also a large number of people for whom poverty is no longer an issue and thus they can focus on more complex achievements. Unfortunately, a present-focused view of the world limits the scope of achievements to only those that can happen short-term, forgoing more complex ones that require more time and show benefits later in the future – in some cases well after we are dead. To present my dilemma more clearly: How many would be willing to dedicate their time for future achievements, thus sacrificing some of their well-being today so that future generations would enjoy a better life?

My guess is that very few.

It is as if almost everyone adopted the Keynesian view of “in the long run we are all dead”. The future no longer matters and it remains only in the dreams of Sci-Fi writers and movies.

But has it not occur to anyone that if we no longer care about our future, we may no longer have one?

Ever since the first humans walked upon the face of the Earth they have always shown an insatiable desire to know more about themselves and the world around them. A thirst for knowledge as it is often called. This thirst has developed over the millennia and today exists as a structured method, guided by well-defined rules, known as science. Science has taken humanity away from its harsh life only 5 centuries ago and is now universally embraced as a fundamental method of inquiry. However, this is not without its flaws as it will be further shown.

Although this may not seem obvious for everyone, humans actually live in two worlds. One world is the physical world, the world were science originated from, the world of physics, chemistry, astronomy, computer science and the like. The world were the laws are natural laws, completely independent of humanity, and where in fact human existence is dependent on them. For example most of the goods consumed in society are the result of humanity’s understanding and usage of these laws.

The second world is the world of humans. It is a world made up of social constructions like economics, politics and law. A world which is not independent of human existence, in fact it is the creation of humanity. From governments to economic systems and laws, all are products of human endeavours and will always be created and recreated based on what humans see fit. Yet this is where the problem of science arises, because being a universally embraced method it is also used in order to find the fundamental laws that make the world of humanity work (social sciences). Yet, these laws are not natural laws, these are laws created by humans themselves and as history teaches us, they can always change. Applying science in the world of humanity to understand why things are the way they are, is as if a person keeps forgetting the reasons for his or hers decisions and keeps asking himself or herself “why did I do what I did”? By no means is the scientific method useless in humanities (social sciences) but the task it sets to achieve, that is finding an explanation to why things are the way they are, is simply never in reach. Even after decades of research there is little hope for one to find fundamental truths or a certain set of laws, like the laws of gravity in science, on which all social scientists agree. If this is the case, then it must be that something is missing…

It just might be the case that for understanding the human world, something slightly different than the scientific method is needed. Although it may use the same tools, like logical deduction and empirical testing, it may have to look at the world from a different perspective then to simply understand it,  possibility by adding a drop of creativity. The closest analogy to a proper human science can be found in architecture. Where if someone tries to use the scientific method to study for example all the cathedrals in the world, he or she will never find some fundamental law that explain their construction or the factors that determined  each one of them to be different from the other and even if it did, the answer will have little usability for the rest of the world besides being a simple curiosity. This is because the correct approach would be not to understand why cathedrals are made the way they are, but to see how cathedrals can be built, how can they be improved and how can the knowledge used in their construction help in other  architectural projects. The same applies in social sciences, where the goal is not to decipher why we do things the way we do, but how they should be done. How can we make a better constitution, a better economic system, a better international order?  The world of humanity is a construction and social sciences are the art of constructing this world.Catherdal design