2024 Author: Harry Day | [email protected]. Last modified: 2023-12-17 15:43
This post is about a thought. More precisely, about the limitations of human thinking and the consequences. About the alternatives that are available to the thinking person.
After getting to know the hat, the reader may have a question: what did you smoke, dear comrade? The author did not smoke. He doesn't take any brain stimulants at all, including alcohol and philosophy. Nevertheless, further stated will be in the same spirit. The author is concerned about the topic raised from the practical point of view, as a researcher and naturalist.
For what purpose was a thought given to a person? I propose to scroll through the question: by whom exactly was it given? The post format will not pull it out. So, why does a man need a thought? Security is the first obvious thing to be answered. Ensure safety in all possible ways.
Physical safety can be considered assured if a person is alive and well without serious injury. This is where a thought can help. However, if we analyze the behavior of animals (living creatures closest to the human species), it will be found that during natural disasters, animals behave more intelligently than humans. For example, they leave the danger zone in advance: volcanic eruption, earthquake, fire. Or jellyfish, absolutely brainless creatures, leave the coastline a few hours before the storm.
Perhaps the thought was created to ensure the psychological safety of a person? There are a lot of doubts here too. After all, it is thought that humanity "owes" the existence of thousands of all kinds of phobias, a chronic state of anxiety and the fact that deprives a person of the opportunity to feel safe psychologically: envy, despondency, disappointment, shame, lust …
If not security, then what? Does it not turn out that the thought was created to demonstrate to a person his imperfection? After all, the nature of thought is egocentric, closed on itself, on "to survive, no matter what." And now, finding himself in such a deplorable state, a person, with the help of thought, had to come to the appropriate conclusion. According to the plan. If so, then, as a result of a software failure (you cannot say otherwise), the thought received exclusive rights to ensure its own security, in all its manifestations, and refused to testify in favor of the obvious fact.
More precisely, thought constantly testifies falsely, ignoring the obvious thing - humanity, systematically destroys itself and everything that surrounds it. Altruists don't count. It is found that the interference of thought in natural and social processes, with good intentions, turns into disaster. The world is too big and the thought is too small.
What should the thought itself strive for? What is her personal goal? Extend your existence, up to immortality. She is busy with this question. She is afraid of death. Thought is not capable of proving that a person is immortal. She, with a tenacity worthy of respect, seeks security and immortality where they are without her. Moreover. Their presence is hidden from a person by thought.
It can be assumed that a silent, self-withdrawn thought is the main condition for a person's intelligent life. Reasonable life. Today's existence cannot be called reasonable, except for birth and death, but this, just, is controlled by reason, not thought.
How to bring the thought itself back to the original idea? To the state when, having reached its limit, revealing its own helplessness in front of a force much greater than itself - the thought will subside?
And what is this limit? Is he there? If you look at people who use their intellectual abilities intensively, it cannot be said that they are close to the limit. That they stepped over it. Yes, some of them deliberately concealed the results of their own activities, under the pretext that humanity is not yet ready for them. Not ready! In its present position. It is not said: he will not need them at all.
If a person still has the ability to stop a thought before it “pulls the strings” to the point of irreparable, then the stop must be of a natural nature. Various methods of control, meditation, stimulants are not suitable.
Any artificial means will lead to dependence of a person on "external" tools. And addiction, in turn, will distort direction. As a demonstration - an example of creative people. Some of them, in anticipation of their genius, muse, lyre … fall into depression, break down, try to stimulate themselves outwardly … Receiving the gift of creativity as an inheritance, as a result of trauma, spiritual experience, they regard what happened to them as an accident. They can't read the music of their relationship with their gift. Waiting is their sad state.
Thought can only be stopped by direct relation. A fully conscious person. He is actively involved in the process, from start to finish. To the very limit.
Then the false witness, perhaps, will change his testimony.
