Thursday, October 6, 2011

Clockwork

I was unable to post last weekend because I was on a retreat and the weekend before that because I was sick but I'm sure all of my readers out there will understand. It was, however, a fortunate thing that I didn't write immediately because I was listening to Radio Lab a few days ago on KERA (Yes, I'm name dropping for the cause of public radio) and they had a program on about stochasticity, which my text editor is claiming to be a word that does not exist in the English language but, let me assure you, stochasticity is a word which means, essentially, randomness. Within the program, they began talking about what makes up our bodies, breaking it down to the microscopic level of genes that make protein and what scientists expected to find, but didn't (much to their chagrin), was that the genes would output protein in a relatively stable manner.

Even though this can be seen as destroying their original hypothesis, it brings up a good point. We, as humans, tend to put things in nice little packages. There are electrons, neutrons and protons, which are a part of atoms, which are a part molecules, which are a part of proteins, which are a part of humans, which are a part of civilizations, which are a part of the universe. It all scales up and down, seamlessly... well, almost. Asking the question "What makes up a human?" and expecting a full answer is a little far-fetched in our day and age. Similarly, asking "What makes up an atom?" won't probably get you the full answer you expect when you take into account the Heisenberg uncertainty principle. This leads me to my next assumption:

Reality is constructed of arbitrarily definable but, possibly, not completely indivisible components that interact with each other.

That's a mouthful.

Regardless, what I mean is this. Reality, as a whole, is constructed of components that make up larger entities and, even though at times we may not be able to see all the gears that make up this clockwork, we can definitely count on the fact that there are parts to it that will make it tick. Some parts we would label to be distinct from others. We may say that gear itself is a unique part of the framework but, in the end, it is arbitrarily chosen through our conscious belief in similarity and, probably more important, dissimilarity. Half of the gear is not seen as it's own component. No, the entire gear is seen as the component. The gear and a shaft are not seen as one component. No, these two are easily taken apart, one replaced without the other if the need arises and it is not seen as replacing part of a whole. Even it was, that would be arbitrarily defined. So, you see, in this way, I see our reality as being constructed by arbitrarily defined, but, potentially, not completely indivisible parts.

Furthermore, I would venture to say, as we have looked at in a previous post, the mere existence of an entity (existor) to another entity (existee) can have an effect upon the existee and, therefore, any form that the existor takes with its existence, sometimes denoted as an action or state, may have an effect upon the existee. We commonly perceive this in the temporal realm of existence to denote change and, through the assumption I have stated, this is implied to be possible. The existor interacts with the existee and, potentially, vice-versa. To go back to the clockwork example, the gears themselves will turn, making other gears turn within the clock, making not only the existee (the primary mover) change but also the existor (the reactor to the primary mover) change as well.

Finally, I want to make sure that I go back to my original paragraph in this post, in case you are starting to think that I consider the universe to be clockwork. That's not what I'm saying at all and I would rather not box myself into that assumption given the results of that scientific study. In a later post, we will actually see that the question of free will has little relevance in the grand scheme of things but that's for another time.

Until then, I wish you the best in your philosophical inquiries and please post any comments or questions you may have about what's in here. I would love any feedback.

1 comment:

  1. Hello synchronicity. I just, and I mean literally, just, listened to that very episode of Radio Lab...which is made even stranger by the fact that I haven't listened to Radio Lab in at least 6 months. Yesterday I downloaded a bunch of episodes and listened while working it out and then on my commute. Wake up this morning and bam. See you have a BLOG and blogged about Radio Lab. What does it mean? Who knows. But def. means enough to post a comment to point it out. In a piece of the puzzle cosmic sort of a way. Happy Friday Matt.

    ReplyDelete