The blind man and the elephant seems an apt comparison. Humans can only know what is given, and that given is reality for humans. When other humans have similar experiences and when mathematics provides information concerning the structure of reality as knowable there is knowledge of the reality that humans encounter being formalized. That is pragmatic and useful.
Explorers could ever only discover phenomena and not noumena. They may use an associahedrons to find the scattering patterns and models of new particles yet not see with their own eyes the quantum realm of fermions. https://golem.ph.utexas.edu/category/2024/10/associahedra_in_quantum_field.html
The Universe itself may be ungrounded; suspended in nothingness without boundaries, rhyme or reason for being except the will of God; or for unbelievers postulating a Cod of the Gaps to escape quantum fields perhaps expanding while dispersing with entropy and salvation.
Uncertainty and gaps; spacing intervals, being and non being, form and substance plus colors in some light allow the common experience for humanity. Human reality could be inside a kachinka doll or recursive puzzle box with greater and lesser realities.
People need understand first what is given and proximal and perhaps non-local too sometime and speculate with metaphysics from the known; like Plato’s troglodyte prisoners, with logical inference, science and with whatever revealed knowledge from a superior being may be provided.
A question; how is an 'absolute' truth different from a truth? Kierkegaard hated Hegel's use of the word absolute. He thought it wasn't meaningful. Maybe he would have used Hume's metaphysical non-sense shears on it.
No comments:
Post a Comment