|
Space and Matter
With the first incident and further events
Manuscript. 19.01.2007.
© All rights reserved
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
Unknown
|
|
|
Something is unknown only as long as we can’t remember.
To remember: [Origin: 1300–50; ME remembren < OF remembrer < LL rememorārī,
equiv. to re- re- + L memor mindful (see memory) + -ārī inf. suffix] to recall to the mind
by an act or effort of memory; think of again. © dictionary.com
According to the dictionary, unknown is: Not known to some- or anybody.
This means not admitting or declaring to someone or admitting to no-one that he has recognized or recognizes. This again means that someone hasn’t or no-one has mentally captured or captures. This again means that someone doesn’t or no-one does remember that he knows. This again means that someone doesn’t or no-one does use his thinking consciousness, his intellectual power, and his brains.
Recognizing: Using all sensory organs as well as the analytic part of the brain, so that someone knows who or what something is (t. 01-31-07).
|
|
 |
I know. |
|
I know and I use what I know …
|
I understand.
|
I can understand.
|
I could understand.
|
If I find out, I will …
|
I just want to know enough to destroy.
|
I try to not know, but …
|
Simple-minded and gullible in regard to fearsome things.
|
Knowing something is painful.
|
I cannot know.
|
| I don’t know. |
|
With all these words, whose meanings are derived from the dictionary, the following is to say:
| If something like the unknown exists, then it is to find solely within oneself. |
If someone recognizes something within himself, he doesn’t have to duplicate. If someone recognizes something elsewhere, then he has already duplicated, or he wouldn’t have recognized.
Duplicating here means: He has to find what he tries to recognize within his own intellect, and it has to be identical.
| If something can be found, then it already exists, or it couldn't be found. |
An example: If someone has never seen a tractor, one could claim that the tractor is unknown to him. If he then spots a tractor, he says: „I see! This is a tractor“. He sees the tractor and suddenly knows that it is a tractor. Now tell a dog: „Look, this is a tractor“. If it is your dog and if he responds well to you, he will wag his tail and jump over to the tractor. However, he won’t show any „I-see-reaction”. He will sniff at the tractor, run around for some time, and then leave it. He cannot find anything comparable within his mind and thus can’t do anything with it. But a human being can. He sees the tractor, compares it with the data in his mind, finds them, modifies, and says: „Well, this is a tractor. What can I do with it, what can be moved, what will I gain?” And even without experience he will soon find the location of the gear shift, the gas pedal, and the brakes. He will know how to control the tractor by means of the steering wheel, and what else he is able to do with it, provided that his mind works properly. Someone whose mind does not work properly, who cannot find data as easily within his mind in order to duplicate them, has to take great pains to learn that, over a long period of time, and with the help of others.
You see, man doesn’t need additional experience; he already is experienced. It just may be that he has „forgotten”, so to speak, or, if he remembers, cannot properly modify, which could be an indication of a malfunctioning mind.
Modifying here means: To compare the unknown with the well-known, then finding an equivalent, and then duplicating it until it is completely identical with the unknown. Example: A triangle that is known to us and a rectangle that is unknown to us. We compare them and see that both have an identical sideline. We duplicate this known element, the line, and now we know what a rectangle is.
If something is unknown, it is only possible that someone hasn’t recognized it, that no-one has recognized it, that someone hides the fact that he has recognized it, or that everybody hides the fact that they have recognized it.
It is claimed that the evolutionary line of man began about 38 million years ago. And over all that time he has gathered an enormous amount of data. It is amazing how little he did know back then to discover the novel, to recognize, to devise, to develop, to bring into being, or whatever you'd like to call it. And yet he has recognized so much. To recognize the novel, you need experience, but man didn’t have experience up to this point. What he did have was basic knowledge, which again had to come from experience, which again raises the question of when human evolution did actually begin. But that’s another topic. What interests us here is: Why do we lack these few valuable data to recognize things quickly and easily? First: Man has never recognized quickly and easily, neither back then, nor later, nor today. And that’s because man has always occupied himself with things already recognized, rather than looking for novel things. That’s how over the course of time he lost his ability to recognize the novel. The world is a disc, how nice; the world is a disc. I’ve got a TV; how nice, I've got a TV, so I watch TV for a hundred years, even if it makes me sick sometimes. After all, I can also do something else, something well-known, of course. And that’s how life lazily strolls along the time-track. And when there is a problem that contains unknown data – otherwise it wouldn’t be a problem –, chaos ensues. The second problem why we constantly lose sight of those few basic data is that we have such a great amount of data so that we cannot easily see these few data. It’s like the proverbial search for the needle in the haystack. We must not forget that we need these basic data to be able to modify and thus recognize anything.
| We have to make an effort to retrieve that which is lost and hidden. |
You can look for it, run around in the world to pursue, to trace, to sniff it out, and collect even more data, shower the needle with even more hay. Or you can delve deeply, strive for insight about the meaning of life, the nature of the universe, and man’s position within the universe; you can ponder a problem, brood about something and talk about it, and if you spend enough time and try hard enough, you will recognize something novel, and what was unknown by then will be known. But it will take a lot of time and a lot of effort, there will probably be great losses and many deaths, and there’s certainly the danger of giving up half-way. You can get your driver’s license within three weeks or three months, you can have a rough ride or an easy one, and you can never take the test. You do not act with good methods, you do not search with good tools, and you do not delve with good techniques. You look at the wrong place, and you delve without knowing exactly what it is that you seek. You rummage through the data that are already known. This is like wanting to make multiple apples from one apple, and then looking at the apple for the solution. You examine this apple, then another apple, and then a third one. Sometime, you will also find the seeds, but you still do not know how to make multiple apples. How many apples have to die until you manage to make multiple apples? What a coincidence does it have to be? Why don’t you go right to the spot where you can make an apple, namely into the ground? The answer is simple: Because you have forgotten (t. 01-07-07).
To delve: Asking, striving for insight.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Admitting or the new unknown
|
|
|
When someone or everyone recognizes something, they have to admit that, take it into their mind, and keep it. If they don’t do that, then it’s kind of like refusing or forgetting, and it isn’t true for them. Then it is unknown to someone or everyone.
To admit: Knowing, recognizing, acknowledging; confessing.
If someone recognizes something and then admits it, others also have to recognize it. Otherwise it remains unknown for them. In order to be able to recognize what someone admits, they have to duplicate what the other one has recognized. However, the others are only able to duplicate if they have experienced the same things as the one who admits his experience. If the others are able to duplicate what someone admits to them, then the one who admits still does not know what the others have recognized. Only if the others who have duplicated admit what they have recognized, nothing is unknown to anybody anymore. This is agreement.
Experience: Knowledge that is gained by movement or immobility of the ego, the mind, as well as about 200 sensory organs (t. 01-31-07).
Duplicating here means: Your own experience resembles any other experience.
It can also be different. If someone recognizes something and then admits it, others have to recognize it as well. Otherwise it remains unknown for them. In order to be able to recognize what someone admits, they have to duplicate what the other one has recognized. However, the others are only able to duplicate if they have experienced the same things as the one who admits his experience. If the others are unable to duplicate what someone admits to them, then the others do not know what someone knows. If the others are now forced to agree with the one who admitted, or if they do so of their own accord, then we have faith.
But what about the one who admits to have recognized? If he admits, then this means that he has experienced, duplicated, and thus recognized. And what did he duplicate with? He has duplicated it with the experience he has gained at an earlier date, with the experience that he has admitted; otherwise he couldn’t have recognized this experience, and admitting it would be a lie. This then means that this experience, which he now admits, is a repeated experience. At an earlier date he had the necessary experience to recognize what he admits. There’s only one catch. When was that supposed to be? No matter when, he had to duplicate it with an earlier experience, or he never would have recognized it.
Does it mean that we agree with a lie? Yes, we do. Somebody is exhausted, tired, and happy to have recognized something. Now he rests and beholds what he has recognized. And if someone comes along and claims that it’s a lie, that there is something unknown, then he is opposed by others. The others are exhausted from not-experiencing and say: „It is like that, we believe it, this is our truth now, and then our being together is fine.” In this way their doing is coordinated; otherwise chaos would arise, and we wouldn’t be able to do anything reasonable. This would also be fine somehow. We are already used to a more torturous life, if it becomes possible for a lie to stay indefinitely.
Sooner or later someone will come along and say: „Hey, this is a lie, something is unknown, and we have to discover it, investigate it, and recognize it.” And he will immediately start. If he is too weak to resist, then the others will oppose him and bury him soon enough. If he is strong enough to resist, then we’ll soon have a new belief.
And fortunately, some people are forceful enough to discover, to investigate, and to recognize, so that today we no longer believe, for instance, that the earth is a disc or that the stars are attached to a glass dome.
If, however, nobody discovers the lie, then infinity and the universe, i.e. the laws of nature, or our life and survival in the future, if you so will, will confront us with so many problems that we are forced to ponder what is unknown to us.
If we then base the search for the solution of our problems on lies, then they will become lies themselves, i.e. no good solutions (t. 01-31-07).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
When is something unknown to someone?
|
|
|
Technically, there is always something that is unknown to us. If we are willing and able, we can find plenty of unknown things each and every day.
Something is unknown if someone doesn’t confront the unknown.
To confront: The ability to perceive without shying away, avoiding, or walking away.
Furthermore, something is unknown if someone confronts it with the instinctual id. In this case, the instinctual is known to him, but rationality is unknown to him nevertheless.
Furthermore, something is unknown if someone confronts it with morality. In this case, morality is known to him, but change, being different, is still unknown to him.
Furthermore, something is unknown if someone doesn’t confront it with all his about 200 sensory organs. In this case, something is known to him, but the knowledge is poor, and many things are unknown.
Furthermore, something is unknown if someone fails to gather new experience. In this case, everything new is unknown to him.
Furthermore, something is unknown if someone doesn’t use the analytical part of the mind. In this case, it is impossible for him to form terms, come to conclusions, judge, or think.
Analytical part of the mind: The part of the mind that analyzes data, forms terms, draws conclusions, judges, and thinks.
Furthermore, something is unknown if someone or everyone refrains from admitting what they know. In this case, any kind of knowledge is unknown to them.
Depending on the comprehensiveness of somebody’s knowledge of something, this something is more or less unknown to him.
If something is without matter, then this something without matter can be unknown to someone.
If something has matter, then this matter’s awareness can be unknown to someone.
If something has matter and awareness, then the sensory organs of this matter, which has awareness, can be unknown to someone.
If something has matter, awareness, and sensory organs, then the mind of this matter, which has awareness and sensory organs, can be unknown to someone.
If something has matter, awareness, sensory organs, and mind, then the processes of this matter, which has awareness, sensory organs, and mind, can be unknown to someone.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There are two basic unknown quantities
|
|
|
It is strange that many people directly correlate the word „unknown” to „that which is out there”. If there is something that one doesn’t know, then it is unknown to him. One can believe that it refers to something else, but it isn’t connected. They are in projection to each other.
The non-knowledge, i.e. something that is not known, is the first unknown quantity. The second unknown quantity is what he doesn’t know. The fact that someone doesn’t know, and that which he does not know, are two different data.
The first unknown quantity is the unknown within himself. It is his awareness that tells him that there’s something he doesn’t know. It is a feeling of emptiness, of absent things, omitted things, incomplete things, and dangerous or non-dangerous things. He knows that there’s something he doesn’t know, and he knows that something’s wrong.
Then, knowingly, deliberately, intentionally, follows the assumption or the assumed direction toward something. Since he knows that he will only recognize something unknown if he is able to duplicate, he first has to find the known projection of the unknown within himself. If he doesn’t find it, it will always remain unknown, unless he finds it in the moral or instinctual part of his mind, but in that case it’s blind following or faith rather than duplication and thus not in agreement with himself and not actually recognized.
The second unknown quantity is the unknown that imposes or doesn’t impose itself on him if he fails to recognize it. This one hails from the moral and the instinctual part of his mind, from his own body, and also from the moral and the instinctual part of every living creature’s mind and their bodies. It also comes from everything environmental, from the physical universe, from everything combined, including all processes.
Definition unknown quantity: 1) A word that conveys an emotion, which points out what is unknown to someone or known to no one. 2) An assumption or an assumed direction in regard to something that either wants to harm or improve someone. 3) Somebody requests an activity to free himself (t. 26.07).
| The unknown is within oneself. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
How does the unknown behave?
|
|
|
Somebody is in the woods, and he doesn’t know that there are things like poisonous mushrooms. Put another way, he lacks the knowledge or he does not know what kind of knowledge he lacks. Something is unknown within himself. And out there – not within himself – is this poisonous mushroom that is unknown to him. He now establishes a connection between his own unknown quantity, i.e. the fact that something is unknown to him, and the unknown quantity out there, i.e. that which is unknown to him.
If someone encounters a person, and he doesn’t know if the other one wants to kill him, then the other one can confess and say „I want to kill you” or give some kind of signal, which he will do intentionally or unintentionally. The victim now knows that, and he can run away. However, if the victim fails to listen, to interpret certain signs, or to use his sensory organs to recognize something, then he will soon be dead.
The poisonous mushroom wants to confess himself – and indeed he does so. He doesn’t want to be eaten, after all. That’s the reason why he is poisonous. He is unable to speak, but he can show by means of his appearance or with the aid of his features that he is poisonous. And he indeed does so. If despite that someone fails to use his sensory organs, his senses, then both are dead.
The other way round, it can also be that the mushroom doesn’t know that he is poisonous, and that the murderer doesn’t know that he is a murderer. In that case neither can confess himself. Then nobody is able to recognize it without experiencing it, and this experience is called death.
One could assume that unknown people should be avoided, as well as things of which one doesn't know if they are edible. In other words: Avoid all things unknown or minimize the contact where possible. Some kind of safeguard. However, this isn’t a good solution and won’t work in the long run. The problem isn’t confronting the unknown but rather not-confronting. Everybody wants to survive, and if everyone recognizes and honestly admits his unknown data, which they will do automatically, nothing will be unknown to anyone. Neither people, nor other creatures, nor the physical universe - nothing would be unknown to anyone. It is in everybody’s interest that the unknown is clarified. Not even those who lose if they enlighten themselves are interested in the unknown. Nobody would hide, lie, or run away. Every problem can be attributed to the unknown. Without the unknown there aren’t any problems, there's only attending.
If somebody receives an improvement by that which he doesn’t know, then his condition is not as well as it can, should, or has to be.
If somebody receives impairment by that which he doesn’t know, then he is in danger.
In either case, improvement or impairment, there is a driving force at work that urges him into activity to clear up the matter.
If somebody doesn’t admit what he knows, then his knowledge is unknown to others. These others can then gain knowledge about someone by their own experience, but only if they are able to duplicate, i.e. they already have their own similar experience of this subject.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The unknown leads to death
|
|
|
If somebody knew how to live his life forever, he wouldn’t die. However, it is unknown to him, and so he dies.
The logic of Aristotle – it is like it is because it is like it is. Back then, he did what he could, but for many people today it is only an excuse for the omitted responsibility to confront the unknown.
Due to his inability to duplicate, our visitor of the woods has learned a lesson of experience that he had to pay for with his life and with that of the mushroom. We can only hope that someone has seen it; otherwise there would have been more casualties. If someone has seen it, then we hope that he had his wits about him and that he came to the conclusion that it leads to death if this mushroom is eaten. In addition, we hope that he keeps this perception in his mind, and that he finally admits, stays truthful, and tells us about it. All of this has happened, involving who knows how many casualties, and today we know that these mushrooms are poisonous. We don’t eat them, and we protect those who still don’t know.
The visitor of the woods can also be saved from death. Example: A plane has crashed in the woods. The visitor of the woods is the only survivor. He gets increasingly hungry, but doesn’t find anything edible. He is at risk of starving. The others are dead, and he can’t eat the dead, he is at risk of being eaten by animals before he can hunt something edible, etc. He nearly starves to death. Then he stumbles across some mushrooms. After wood and leaves didn’t help him, he now also eats these mushrooms. He recovers. There are enough mushrooms left, and he lies down to sleep, happy and confident that later he will again have something to eat. If during sleep he isn’t eaten by an animal, he will wake up later. However, there are no mushrooms left. During his sleep, some animal has been hungry too. Again the man gets dangerously hungry. Now he knows that there are mushrooms in the woods. He looks for them and finds enough mushrooms. He eats, recovers, and he is fine. He dances, plays, lives an easy life, and enjoys his existence. Then, one day, a cannibal comes to him. Our visitor of the woods doesn’t even suspect that there is such a thing, it was unknown to him, and he didn’t seek the unknown, he was dancing and enjoying himself. The cannibal was incredibly hungry. Our visitor of the woods has saved the cannibal’s life. If it wasn’t a cannibal, it could have been a lion, the climate change, or something else that was new and unknown.
Every problem is omitted knowledge; something is unknown and threatens life. Everyone looks for the solution of his problems, looks for the unknown. Without the unknown there would be no problems.
If someone thinks that the unknown isn’t important because what he knows ensures a good life for him, he is in danger because sooner or later he will encounter the unknown, which will make life difficult for him, more or less, until it finally kills him. Sooner or later, the unknown kills. And before the unknown totally destroys someone, it hurts him in every respect. Each time someone is hurt by the unknown, one or several others are automatically hurt as well.
A game takes place in the universe, and everybody plays along. If someone’s ego isn’t blocked by moral, and if he doesn’t need to restrain his desires, his ego says: „I want to deliberately play along.”
The universe has an infinite number of unknown quantities for us.
| It is of vital importance to recognize the unknown. |
So far, the experience has yielded two dead and the rescue of one suffering famished person. In eiher case, there is something wrong with the experience. In the first case there are two dead, and in the second case someone goes hungry because of his lack of experience, e.g. in building a refrigerator. One can imagine how many have fallen prey to experience during the last 45 million years. But what about this experience? If used deliberately, experience is like a tool. But even if it isn’t used deliberately, the tool is busy. One way or another, living beings continuously gather experience; all living beings continuously experience some kind of infliction. At least, the being has to know that it exists. And for that, it needs no experience apart from that one second in which it emerges for the first time. In order to know that it exists, it doesn't even have to agree with himself or someone else. And in the same manner, everyone else who exists for more than a second knows that he exists. That way, it isn’t unknown to anyone, even without taking any kind of action to admit it. In other words, there is no unknown quantity here. It’s true for everyone, even without admitting, and everyone is able to duplicate it. And each one of us has an infinite amount of experience.
In other words, everyone has to recognize for himself. In that case, all know what they know among themselves. There is no unknown quantity, there is only what is not yet recognized, which therefore prevents us from duplicating.
| There is nothing that is unknown; there is only that which is not yet recognized. |
Example: Back then, people thought that the world was a disc. Here the unknown is an orb. When people later found out that the world was an orb, they didn’t change the unknown. It is still an orb, just as it has been before people recognized it. If they have changed something, they have changed their own nescience. They changed the word „unknown” into the word „known”. The unknown itself wasn’t, isn’t, and never will be unknown or known. It is what it is, namely an orb.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If someone decides that he knows
|
|
|
If someone decides that he knows, no matter in what regard, he’s unknowingly caught in a trap, and he is in danger. He will face a number of difficulties and problems that he will never be able to solve correctly. Someone like that deals with problems and solutions in an arbitrary way.
Here’s an example: Back then, people thought that the earth was a disc. They recognized it that way, and as to that there remained no unknown quantity and hence no need to keep occupying themselves with the unknown. Because of that, some of their procedures were wrong.
What has happened here? Quite simple. People only had this one data, i.e. the earth being a disc, and because the known and the unknown somehow were identical for them, they didn't pay much attention to the unknown, i.e. they opted for the known. If they had regarded it as two separate data and had paid more attention to the unknown, it wouldn’t have taken them so many years to recognize the earth being an orb. Humanity could have avoided a great deal of trouble back then.
If someone decides that he knows something, he has come to an agreement with this something, i.e. he agrees that something is like it is. Someone can also agree with somebody else, who shows or says that it is like it is. In either case, no absolute knowledge exists.
If somebody replaces the words “not knowing” with another word, e.g. „unknown”, he gains a little piece of unreal knowledge.The line between knowing and not knowing isn’t clear anymore. It is pure deception to move a short way from complete nescience, thus having a justification to take little or even no action at all. In a manner of speaking, it is „I’m not responsible” or „What you don’t know won’t hurt you”. Some kind of numbing one’s own emotions, related to nescience.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If someone decides that he does not know
|
|
|
If someone decides that he doesn’t know, he has opened the first gate to recognition. He has built a bridge between his own unknown, his not-knowing, and that which is unknown to him, what he doesn’t know. The unknown is now in action and automatically focuses on its targets. In life, this means that someone can exactly tell when nescience and knowledge are at work.
If someone has realized what the unknown is, what nescience and knowledge are, then his emotional power is free, and it spurs him into action. Such people, regardless of where they are or what they do, strive for insight and recognize a lot of new data. However, if they come close to others, they are opposed by them. „Don’t philosophize”, or „We have more important things to do”, or „What do you want with that?”, or „Stop it!”, etc. is what they will say again and again. If they stay in their proximity, they are at risk of stopping their search at some point, and they will do that.
Philosophy: Striving for insight regarding the meaning of life, the nature of the world, and man’s position within the world.
Insight: Understanding that is gained by processing impressions and experiences.
Mind: Man’s thinking consciousness, his brains, and his intellect.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unknown data are infinitely numerous
|
|
|
We can see that the unknown accompanies us each and every day. Each time we want to solve problems, unknown quantities are at work. There’s a lack of data. This has always been the case, and unless we change the circumstances, it will stay that way forever.
Even if we think that everything is clear, this is not correct. Somewhere there is an unknown quantity, and it will show up sooner or later.
Back then, people thought that the earth was a disc, but the unknown was at work. The unknown exists, whether or not people know that it exists. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The line between knowing and not knowing
|
|
|
We can see that the unknown accompanies us each and every day. Each time we want to solve problems, unknown quantities are at work. There’s a lack of data. This has always been the case, and unless we change the circumstances, it will stay that way forever.
Even if we think that everything is clear, this is not correct. Somewhere there is an unknown quantity, and it will show up sooner or later.
Back then, people thought that the earth was a disc, but the unknown was at work. The unknown exists, whether or not people know that it exists.
The line between knowing and not knowing is comparable with a wall made of granite that is very hard to overcome, very high, and very long. And we don't have the required tools to cut a hole – even a small one – into the wall somewhere to take a peek at the other side.
For man, the difference between the unknown and the known is enormous. The known ranges from the atoms to the galaxies right up to faith. The unknown is just that: unknown. This is why man mainly occupies himself with the known. The known is what he has; the unknown is what he hasn’t. He sticks to the known, for else only the unknown would remain for him. |
|
| Unknown |
| Line |
|
Known |
|
| Line |
| Unknown |
|
What can man do with the unknown? He can occupy himself with the unknown, and that is already a lot, in fact, it’s inexhaustible, for the unknown is infinetely numerous. And before he fancies to have recognized the unknown in faith, god, or similar things, he should better roll up his sleeves and do something to recognize this infinite unknown bit by bit and stop his perpetual quarreling with grief and loss.
One could even say that it is a necessity, and thus our duty, to occupy ourselves with the unknown and therefore make it known to us. Only by recognizing the unknown and turning it into something known are we able to achieve an optimum amount of knowledge, which we are so direly in need of to survive in the future.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The technology to recognize something
|
|
|
The most important thing is that a person understands that the unknown is always there and that it is a necessity to recognize it. To see that he is in danger if he fails to recognize this thing, anything.
Since he doesn’t know this anything, he has to confront everything. As soon as he understands that, his natural device of protection kicks in, and he will automatically start to take actions in order to recognize.
Technology: Exactly defined actions and processes to achieve something.
Failing to understand that means that one cannot go in a certain direction. One doesn’t see anything unknown and takes no actions.
| Knowledge is a barrier for the action to recognize the unknown. |
One could also say that the unknown doesn’t actually exist. There are only things that are not recognized yet.
If we see known data as relatively known, or if we don’t wait for the unknown to come knocking at our door and instead start up the process of the unknown by ourselves, we are able to recognize important new data that are vital for our future.
Once we manage to start up the unknown, the processes can no longer be stopped. The processes then run automatically, and they also find their target automatically. The target can be anything possible. Anything.
If someone decides to activate the unknown within himself, or if he manages to activate the unknown within another person, then the following processes will be executed: Being alert, thoughtfully watching everything, looking everywhere, delving continuously, constantly being curious, wanting to know everything, a great deal of movement, widespread movement, and all kinds of communication, to name but a few examples.
There are two different methods to deal with the unknown. For one thing, the unknown can be recognized by looking at the known. The second option is to look at the unknown and, independent of the known, recognize what is unknown.
Looking at the known and recognizing the unknown
Here, the point is to refine what is already known, to find different solutions, or to carry out improvements. This is an unsafe method because it is based on the knowledge that man regards as the truth. However, this knowledge also contains the unknown data that one is looking for. It is a blind method, unless one browses through basic data, which then have to be modified.
Truth: The conformity of a statement with the object that it is about. Insight (as a mirror image of reality), doctrine of the real and true.
To conform: Having the same opinion as someone else. To resemble something in kind or nature.
Reality: All that, and the section of it, which can be perceived or experienced as a fact or occurrence.
Real: Existing in reality, not only in imagination.
Fact: A real given circumstance. Something that actually exists or has happened and is provable.
Actuality: An actual, real condition, existence, or circumstance.
Existence: The state of fact of existing, of being.
To exist: To have actual being, to be there.
To be there: To exist, to be statable as existing.
Looking at the unknown and recognizing the unknown
This is a safe method. In this case, one only employs elements of the unknown without falling back on the known. It is like reading everything here and then going to another place and looking for the unknown there. Only when the unknown is found, i.e. discovered, is it projected onto the known, compared with it, or duplicated. If duplication is possible, one can find a similarity with the known that can be modified if necessary to achieve a totally identical duplication. Total recognition is thus achieved.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Summary
|
|
|
The unknown is necessary and vital for every creature. The discovery of unknown quantities is happening perpetually, whether with animals (adaption), with people (development), or within the physical universe (change).
For children, the discovery of the unknown consists of learning what they need to survive or what enables them to lead a good life.
For adults, it consists of finding solutions for the problems that are posed by the physical universe.
The unknown and its discovery are vital factors of man’s existence; they are his ultimate task.
The physical universe is set on change, and these changes are largely unknown to man. If he doesn’t occupy himself with the unknown, he exposes himself to unpleasant surprises.
The unknown reduces understanding and thus the abilities of an individual, a group, a race, or the whole humanity.
The unknown is everything that isn’t known to us. Thus every new discovery is enrichment, whether or not it is useful, right or wrong, good or bad.
Only if the unknown is recognized without distortion (e.g. „The world is a disc”), one has achieved a positive result. One shouldn’t jump to conclusions regarding an unknown quantity, for one never knows whether or not it will come in handy one day.
A discovered unknown quantity is better than every undiscovered unknown quantity.
Man possesses known and unknown quantities in equal measure. If he puts aside the known for a moment, then he will be able to recognize the unknown. If he is brave enough to overcome this huge wall made of granite and look at the other side, man will be able to see the unknown.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Glossary for this page
|
|
|
Admit, to: To acknowledge, to confess. © dictionary.com
Conscious: 1) Aware of one's own existence, sensations, thoughts, surroundings, etc. 2) deliberate, intentional. © dictionary.com
Delve, to: Asking, striving for insight.
Ego: 1) The „I” or self of any person; a person as thinking, feeling, and willing, and distinguishing itself from the selves of others and from objects of its thought. 2) Psychoanalysis. The part of the psychic apparatus that experiences and reacts to the outside world and thus mediates between the primitive drives of the id and the demands of the social and physical environment. © dictionary.com
Experience: Knowledge or practical wisdom gained from what one has observed, encountered, or undergone. © dictionary.com
Fact: A real given circumstance. Something that actually exists or has happened and is provable. A historical, undeniable, unchangeable …
Forget, to: To cease or fail to remember; be unable to recall; to omit or neglect unintentionally. © dictionary.com
Goodwill: [Origin: bef. 900; ME; OE gōd willa]: friendly disposition; benevolence; kindness. © dictionary.com
Intellect: 1) The power or faculty of the mind by which one knows or understands, as distinguished from that by which one feels and that by which one wills; the understanding; the faculty of thinking and acquiring knowledge. 2) Capacity for thinking and acquiring knowledge, esp. of a high or complex order; mental capacity. © dictionary.com
Know, to: To have established or fixed in the mind or memory; to be acquainted with (a thing, place, person, etc.), as by sight, experience, or report. © dictionary.com
Knowledge: The body of truths or facts accumulated in the course of time. © dictionary.com
Known: Of known quantity. © dictionary.com
Look for, to: [Origin: bef. 900; (v.) ME lōk(i)en, OE lōcian; c. MD ken, akin to dial. G lugen to look out; (n.) ME loke act of looking, glance, countenance, deriv. of the v.] To seek, to search for. © dictionary.com
Mind: Man’s thinking awareness, his brains and intellect.
Perceive, to: [Origin: 1250–1300; ME perceiven < AF *perceivre, for perçoivre < L percipere to lay hold of, grasp, equiv. to per- per- + -cipere, comb. form of capere to take] 1) to become aware of, know, or identify by means of the senses. 2) To recognize, discern, envision, or understand. © dictionary.com
Philosophy: Striving for insight about the meaning of life, the nature of the universe, and man’s position within the universe; pondering a problem, brood about something and talk about it.
Ponder, to: [Origin: 1300–50; ME pondren < MF ponderer < L ponderāre to ponder, weigh; akin to pendére to be suspended, hang] 1) To consider something deeply and thoroughly; meditate. 2) To weigh carefully in the mind; consider thoughtfully. © dictionary.com
Preserve, to: [Origin: 1325–75; ME preserven < ML praeservāre to guard (LL: to observe), equiv. to L prae- pre- + servāre to watch over, keep, preserve, observe] 1) To keep alive or in existence; make lasting. 2) To keep up or maintain a certain state, behavior, etc. © dictionary.com
Remember, to: [Origin: 1300–50; ME remembren < OF remembrer < LL rememorārī, equiv. to re- re- + L memor mindful (see memory) + -ārī inf. suffix]: to recall to the mind by an act or effort of memory; think of again. © dictionary.com
Someone: Somebody, an unnamed or unknown person. © dictionary.com
Think, to: To employ one's mind rationally and objectively in evaluating or dealing with a given situation; to have a conscious mind, to some extent of reasoning, remembering experiences, making rational decisions, etc. © dictionary.com
True: Being in accordance with the actual state or conditions; conforming to reality or fact; not false. © dictionary.com
Truth: Being true; conformity of a statement with a fact or object it is about.
Unknown: Not known to some- or anybody.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Toni All © All rights reserved.
|
|
|
