When I refer to nature, I don't simply refer to nature as a whole, but from a perceptive point of view, as the only nature we're most aware, and conscious of is most probably "The Human Nature", as blatant as it sounds, it's quite true, since everything we've perceived, demonstrated , studied, invented, and imagined are all from the perspective of a human being, as we're all blatantly 'humans'.
I know everyone has at one point wondered what the 'true' , or rational nature of reality, or the universe is, besides the system we've created to understand the elements, and fundamentals of it. It's a very thought provoking topic, which can't be simplified easily, as the root of it is simply found in the void, or in infinity - when it comes to infinity , it simply defies everything there is to all we know about the whole universe's nature. What we have come to comprehend as the nature of the universe, may essentially not be the nature of what everything, but only towards who 'we' really are, because everything we view , or comprehend comes from the individual perspective of a human being. There might not ever be any absolute truth to anything out there, no matter who, or how anyone tries to present the agenda for what they believe, and how they preach it, for it'd only show the reflection who they are, and how they function, and how they think. It's getting quite complex, right? Well, no, it's not. How one thinks shouldn't be confused with what one thinks, because no matter what the perception is of an individual remains untouched within the frequent presence of the observation. Everything is untouched, nothing is tampered with, all is just observation. It's just you, and yourself, and your eyes' reflection of reality, not the reality itself that you're actually experiencing. All you are , is just a vessel for the state of what we call "living", "experiencing" , or "feeling", nothing outside of what you believe inside this state, is close to what you think of yourself. The reason why I say this , has already been stated a few sentences back: "WE'RE JUST A FREQUENT PRESENCE OF WHAT WE CALL THE EXPERIENCE OF EVERY REFLECTION PRESENTED BY OUR OWN MIND."
While, this is quite sophisticated, it still stands strong at what it aims to convey in a certain sense of the individual. If indeed , nature is meant to have a balance between bad, and good, and have what Darwin describes as "survival of the fittest", then it goes against a lot of physical properties, when it comes to bonding, separating, and reacting to one another in the surrounding. We have discovered so much in our own sense, yet we have learn almost close to nothing in our whole lifetime as a civilization, therefore, we can't ever come to the inference that there indeed is a true "nature", much like if there was ever an "absolute truth".
While, this is quite sophisticated, it still stands strong at what it aims to convey in a certain sense of the individual. If indeed , nature is meant to have a balance between bad, and good, and have what Darwin describes as "survival of the fittest", then it goes against a lot of physical properties, when it comes to bonding, separating, and reacting to one another in the surrounding. We have discovered so much in our own sense, yet we have learn almost close to nothing in our whole lifetime as a civilization, therefore, we can't ever come to the inference that there indeed is a true "nature", much like if there was ever an "absolute truth".
No comments:
Post a Comment