Table of Contents
In reality, there are levels of complexity. The deeper you go down the physical route, the more straightforward things are (principally).
At the level of chemistry, there’s some complexity to a carbon-hydrogen reaction. But, in a lab, you can make a decent prediction of what’s going to happen. And, you’ll be precisely right; so accurate that the naked eye can’t even see.
Then there’s biology, which is a product of a lot of chemistry. That’s another “layer” of complexity; all the complexities (of chemical reactions) now multiply each other.
Then there’s a human, which is a product of a lot of biology. More complexity.
Then reality. Reality is (almost) infinitely complex.
When precision is no longer 100%, or there’s not enough computation power, there’s ‘randomness’; randomness is a byproduct of complexity.
When there’s more complexity, there’s more randomness, and it’s harder to predict using the “underlying mechanisms”. So we look for patterns, of the systems themselves. That’s ‘abstract knowledge'(“a philosophy of”).
Chemistry is a philosophy of physics, biology is a philosophy of chemistry, and so on.
Philosophy qualitatively summarizes a set of quantitative properties. In other words, ‘abstract knowledge’ is a qualitative abstraction of quantitative properties.
The resulting abstraction is (probably) quantitative. So, it’s turning many specific equations into one (or few) equation.
Although, in higher complexities, with more levels of abstraction, more emphasis is put into the qualitative judgement: ‘nuance’. The equations become too general! With such generalization, the quantitative properties can only point out the obvious, and specific(precise) predictions are impossible; there’s too much randomness.1Excess precision paradoxically worsens predictions.
Add more and more complexity…eventually, there are no equations left. That’s reality, as a whole. That’s life.
Life is (almost) infinitely complex.
The philosophy of life has no numbers. It’s all nuance, totally qualitative.
The truths of life(wisdom) are, almost always, extremely contextual. Most wisdom is only true in certain contexts. Some of them are false(never true) to some people!2Though that would make them not-the-best truths; more like heuristics.
Thus, they’re deeply personal. The details have to be filled out individually. I(or anybody else, really) can’t give you a bunch of examples for you to somehow pattern-match the contexts. Every human is uniquely born into unique circumstances.
2. Individual Progress
All these writings are ‘not’ substantial philosophical works. Obviously. None of them will make an impact on the field of philosophy. And that…doesn’t matter.
It’s not about the academics.
In academics(sciences), the fields “progress” one by one. Someone comes up with a new theory or refutes the old one. A new discovery is made, others verify, and everyone is on the same page.
When it comes to the philosophy of life, nobody adds anything on top of what already exists; rarely does someone find new wisdom. But, nobody is on the same page, because all the truths are contextual, and the details have to be filled out individually.
The philosophy of life, and ownership, is an individual journey. It’s rediscovering the truths by yourself. They have to come from within.
Thus, it’s valid every step of the way. Doesn’t matter how far you’ve progressed (compared to someone else).
In math, the second person who invents a formula gets 0 credit. Because there’s no need to discover anything twice.3That’s why people fight over “who discovered it first.”
You can be the first, or the last person to figure it out. Whatever, pretty good!
3. Have To Come From Within
The philosophy of life can’t really be taught. If the “student” doesn’t want to know, he/she will never understand.
He/she can memorize truths, like math equations. Maybe even answer questions on a test. But in that way, the truth won’t be truths, but merely knowledge. They will always be “of the head”. The knowledge of the head doesn’t change the way we act.
It just doesn’t work that way.4I don’t know why.The knowledge have to be sought out by the individual. The thoughts have to come from within. It’s extremely hard to force thoughts.
You can only inspire someone else. The rest have to happen on their own.
4. Related Posts
Questions & comments are welcome!