Total Pageviews

Sunday, April 25, 2010

Something VS Nothing



It seems we've reached a point in our society where two dominate thought patterns are bidding for control of the world: Those who believe in Something and those who believe in Nothing. Those who believe in Something are convinced, more and more, that there are no coincidences, that everything has meaning, and we are being led on a spiritual journey toward something greater. While those who believe in Nothing are convinced, more and more, that life is merely a series of breaths we take, until we die, and then it ends.
The Nothing crowd is scientifically adept at proving themselves correct. They are convinced by quantum mechanics that life is just random chaos scattered among dying atoms, conversely, those who believe in Something are convinced by the same quantum mechanics that: What we think ... happens. How can two opposing paradigms arise from the same data?
This rift in thought has separated humanity into two very different kinds of people, perhaps even two separate species of human. Those who believe in Something, whether it be God, Religion, Art, or even the various fields of science, all believe in things they can not see. While those who believe in Nothing, believe there is nothing to see, save that which can be seen physically.
While observing the exact same situation, individuals from each of these groups will perceive completely opposite results, and offer completely opposite explanations. Perhaps this is the power of thought? If you believe there is nothing to believe in ... not only will you not believe in it, but you will not even allow your eyes to see it. On the other hand, those who believe in Something, these may create something to see where there is none.
Given the reality that each of us possess two sides to our brain, I'd like to consider it possible, even probable, that humans are capable of seeing reality as it truly is. Without adding to it by projecting what we desire, or subtracting from it by limiting our perceptions through our own non-belief.
More and more, I see these two sides (of the same brain) warring with each other for control over ULTIMATE REALITY. And the battle seems to be getting bloody now, as those on one side of the argument begin to degrade those on the other with slander, to the point of each calling the other "insane".
Perhaps both sides of our brain are useful, and I'd just like to suggest that we might, just for while, try using both sides of our brain in unison. Perhaps this is the formula for seeing reality as it is? As opposed to seeing only what we want it to be? ... or not seeing what we fear it might be?

Chad Lilly is the author of A Day in the Mind and uncommon sense.


Share |
Post a Comment