Recent Twitter Updates

follow me on Twitter

Wednesday, January 15, 2003

Prohibition/Freedom

How geeky is sitting alone in a small coffeehouse at a small table, on the edge of your small seat and hunched over a small book upon which you gaze in small, childlike wonder as you realize slowly that you're on the trail of a much larger discovery? Not just on any trail of discovery, mind you, but on a path that clears the way for a brief analysis of a parallel between human nature and nature itself?

I think it's extraodinarily geeky, yet ultimately constructive and noteworthy, thus:

In Physics there lie laws. One of which is the law that "Every action has an equal and opposite reaction." Never being a mathematical or physics whiz of any sort, I had a hard time seeing the practical applications of this law, or theory. So while I was confused theorectically, I knew that a real-life clarification must have lied in the mathematical mind of my roomate Ryan. As an everyday example of this law of physics, he analogized:

"It's like right now, how you're stepping on the floor- you aren't just stepping on it, pushing down on it ... it's pushing UP on you too. You see, if the floor wasn't pushing up just as much you are pushing down, you would have already gone crashing down through the ground, but you're didn't and you still haven't yet, in fact, here you are, still listening to me explain the same law of physics upon which you abide."

So then, practically, I was situated with the "nature itself" side of the action/reaction parallel. But there was still:

Another wise man and author by the name of J. Krishnamurti who questions the substance of concepts like freedom in terms of "human nature."

"Is this what each individual insists and demands upon - a freedom in which there is no leadership, no tradition, no authority? Otherwise there is not freedom; otherwise when you say you are free from something, it is merely a reaction, which, because it is a reaction, is going to be the cause of another reaction. One can have a chain of reactions, accepting each reaction as a freedom, but that chain is not freedom, it is a continuity of the modified past to which the mind clings."

So now, again practically, what does this all add up to? Is he saying that accepting that "chain," (or human nature acting in accordance with the physical laws of nature) is akin to being "un-free"? Must we transgress and break a major law of physics, of nature, in order to live free lives?

I see a parallel developing, but in which direction I am still blind. Maybe one day all that seems to be just a small sketch of an even smaller sketch, like this journal entry, will be a part of a much bigger picture.

Maybe.

No comments:

Post a Comment