The earth. It's a mystery, isn't it? There's so much we don't understand. So much we don't know. And it's all the more amazing because there's a lot we do know. For example, we know how to generate electricity, we know how to transport people through the air, and we know how to send data from one end of the earth to another. These are no small feats. As recently as the 1950s, some countries did not have commercial television (see here), and commercial air travel really took of after World War II (see here). Yet despite these achievements, there are so many things we just do not know, and which we can only hazard guesses at.
I will go out on a limb here and suggest that some of our ancestors were likely just as arrogant in their "knowledge" as some of us are today; yet we look back at those days and remark how un enlightened they were. But the way science is going suggests others will do the same to us. And sooner. Children today are growing up with touch screens. Just think about that. As recently as the 1990s, typewriters were still the mainstream in several countries. Now people talk about tablets and touch screen phones in most parts of the world.
But despite the strides in science and technology, there is still a lot we do not know. And our systems are still far from perfect. There are medical conditions that doctors do not fully understand, and the current economic crises all over the world are a reminder that our leaders (elected or otherwise) don't always have the right answers (nor the right questions, it seems). I am reminded of the movie, "What the bleep do we know?" (see Amazon link here). I haven't seen it, but I do recall it generated quite a buzz when it came out; it seems many people thought its makers' were on to something - namely, that we do not know as much as we think we do, and we lie to ourselves when we suggest otherwise.
So let's play a thought experiment - let's assume we all agree that individually and collectively, we do not know much. We all agree to be less sure of our facts. We all question our unfounded assumptions. And we do this with rigour, and consistently. What would the world be like? Well, for one, we would all be a lot humbler, more teachable. We would be more open to new ideas and new information. We would test things in the real world more. We would learn from mistakes faster, as we would have less of a hold on "what the world should be like." In short, we would retain a child-like curiosity and sense of awe for life.
Child-like is not necessarily childish; one is a attitude of mind, and the other is a state of mind - one can have the former without the latter. How do you know which characterises you? Try answering two questions: 1. When was the last time you found yourself in a state of awe, surrender or sheer delight because of something external to you which you did not - and could not - own or control?; 2. How did you react the last time the world did not lay over and give you exactly what you wanted, the way you wanted it, when you wanted it? If your answers were "can't remember" and "very badly," respectively, then I would suggest both the attitude and state of your mind could do with some work.
I especially like the first question, as it gets to the heart of how we look at the world, and at life. Are we moved by things external to us or are we ever cynical? Do we only care about the things we own or control, or do we pay attention to life in all its fullness? Are we in touch with our capacity to feel awe and reverence, or are we so far removed from this capacity that nothing moves or impresses us? Lastly, are we humble enough to accept that there's a reality larger than us, which we do not fully understand, yet which is there for us to enjoy?
To be continued...
