“The scientists by large know more liberal arts, than the science known by liberal artists and that needs to change. If you go to a science cocktail party and someone talks about Shakespeare no one is gonna say “Oh I was never good at Shakespeare! I was terrible in nouns and verbs!” No, you’ll never hear that. But if you go to a liberal art party, an artists party, and someone start talking about math it’s all “Oh I was never good at math, I hated math” and they all chuckle and all agree, and all like sip the next sip of champagne and go on talking about the art and that’s somehow ok. No that’s not ok.”—
I agree. But it really makes me sad when I hear scientists saying that literature is useless because it’s all about unreal stories, or that art in general is meaningless because is subjective. It’s not ok this either.
“Can a soul, a conscousness, an “I” arise out of mere matter? If it cannot, then how can you or I be here? If it can, then how can we udnerstand baffling emergence?
Deep down, a human brain is a chaotic seething soup of particles, on a higher level it is a jungle of neurons, and on a yet higher level it is a network of abstractions that we call “symbols”.
The most central and complex symbol in your brain or mine is the one we both call “I”. An “I” is a strange loop in a brain where symbolic and physical levels feed back into each other and flip causality upside down, with symbols seeming to have free will and to have gained the paradoxical ability to push particles around, rather than the reverse.”—
“And therefore I wander these solitary and desolate places in search of adventures, determinded to bring my arm and my person to the most dangerous fortune may offer, in defense of the weak and helpless.”—Cervantes - Don Quixote (via elenahol)
“Mind precedes all things;
mind is their chief, mind is their maker.
If one speaks or does a deed
with a mind that is pure within,
happiness then follows along
like a never departing shadow.”—Dhammapada 1.2 (via ageofreason)