Too many questions…

How do our personalities develop? What do we come with and what is built from our experiences? Once developed, how does personality work? These questions have been steeped in controversy for almost as long as psychology has existed.

In an article in Psychological Review, Carol Dweck tackles these issues. She proposes that our personalities develop around basic needs, and she begins by documenting the three basic psychological needs we all come with: the need to predict our world, the need to build competence to act on our world, and, because we are social beings, the need for acceptance from others. (She also shows how new needs emerge later from combinations of these basic needs.)

Infants arrive highly prepared to meet these needs – they are brilliant, voracious learners on the lookout for need-relevant information. Then, as infants try to meet their needs, something important happens. They start building beliefs about their world and their role in it: Is the world good or bad, safe or dangerous? Can I act on my world to meet my needs? These beliefs, plus the emotions and action tendencies that are stored with them, are termed “BEATs”. They represent the accumulated experiences people have had trying to meet their needs, and they play a key role in personality – both the invisible and the visible parts of personality. (1)

A seemingly elegant theory.

But imagine you are being thrown into an unknown forest.

Waking up among big tall trees. Listening to the silence.

Afraid of the darkness.

What would be your first thought?

How to predict? How to act? How to become… accepted?

Or the simple and raw questions… Where am I? Who am I?

It is easy to get lost in the forest.

If you only look at the millions of trees.

We have lost our ability to ask the right questions.

Because we ask too many…

Illusions, dimensions, beliefs…

A unique experiment at the U.S. Department of Energy’s Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory called the Holometer has started collecting data that will answer some mind-bending questions about our universe – including whether we live in a hologram.

Much like characters on a television show would not know that their seemingly 3-D world exists only on a 2-D screen, we could be clueless that our 3-D space is just an illusion. The information about everything in our universe could actually be encoded in tiny packets in two dimensions.

Get close enough to your TV screen and you’ll see pixels, small points of data that make a seamless image if you stand back. Scientists think that the universe’s information may be contained in the same way and that the natural “pixel size” of space is roughly 10 trillion trillion times smaller than an atom, a distance that physicists refer to as the Planck scale. (1)

Could we live in an illusion?
Could we live in another world?
Could there be more dimensions?

We like to think too much.
We like to believe more than what we see.

But God had a simple plan.

Why not believe what you feel instead?

Analyzing more. Explaining less. Another plague of modern science…

Ecologists are testing more and more hypotheses, but their studies are explaining less of the world. That’s the striking conclusion of a new study that analyzes 8 decades of research papers. What exactly is driving these trends isn’t clear, but researchers fear it could undermine confidence in ecological research.

Since it gained momentum as a formal field of study in the 1800s, ecology has focused on understanding interactions among organisms and their environments. Ecologists have made major contributions to shaping modern views of how the natural world works, from documenting competition and cooperation in nature to clarifying the valuable services that ecosystems can provide to humans, such as purifying water or buffering storms and floods. As in many sciences, however, the field has become less descriptive and more quantitative as it matured. (1)

We tend to over-analyze things. And that will always lead us away from One.

We once thought in Monads. Now we like infinity.

We have taken the wrong path.

And it needs courage to admit it and go back…

As magnocrat said, “An expert is a man who knows more and more about less and less and ends by knowing everything about nothing”. Let us be that man.

Smells, senses, science…

It used to be thought that human noses could only detect around 10,000 smells, although many scientists thought that was probably a bit too low. A new study suggests that number is much higher–that humans can distinguish among 1 trillion different scents. (1)

Even though we may not be able to name them, the “study” tells us that we do sense them.

We like analyzing things too much.

From the sense of being in a forest, we went to 10,000 smells and now to 1,000,000,000,000 smells.
We are in a meta-logical era, where what “is” is determined not by experience, not by you, but by science.
They know how much you feel and how.
You don’t.
One does not exist.
Trust science.

“Seek the empty, if you wish to be full”…

Parmenides, one of the first thinkers, was “empty”. And because of that he was able to understand the fullness of One.

We on the other hand are “full” of knowledge on various subjects. And by over-analysis, we are “empty”…

We have destroyed the mystery in the world. And now all we can do is sit alone in the cold and die…

Exit mobile version