The moon




Bill Bryson (from his book "A short story of nearly everything" - my poor translation from Swedish):

" without the the moon's stabilizing impact, the Earth would swing like a sinking ship. The moon´s gravitation makes the Earth rotate with the right speed and the right angle that is needed for the Earth to develop life.
This will not go on for ever. The moon is going away from us with  four centimeters a year. In about two billion years it will be so far away that we have to find another solution to have the right speed and angle.
Before that I think you can think about the moon as a good fellow in the night sky."


We are often very anthropocentric not thinking about all the circumstances that make it possible for us to be here.

For instance, the bacterias that in the beginning fixed the right level of oxygen on Earth, When the level was right they suddenly stopped the process. No one knows why....

If we meditate or stop thinking for a while we can have some humble distance to our conventional thoughts.
They are shaped by evolution and by our environment. In the short run they can be good for us. Like to be scared and run for your life. But if you become scared to often and for instance own a weapon, we all know it can end in a tragedy.
The unconventional thoughts can be scary for many, as we are primates and dependent on a group and some kind of hierarchy
But some of the unusual thoughts can be more near reality then the rest of them.

Like for Galileo and for people like Glenn Gould.


Yes, I think contrapuntal music is more "real" than more straightforward music.... ;~}


P.S. Even the scientists are not of sure of why the moon looks bigger near the horisont D.S.



Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Cora Diamond on eating animals - with the help of Wittgenstein´s ideas

Image
Cora Diamond is a new name for me, even if she has worked as a professor in Philosophy in the states for a long time and is still  teaching at the university of Virginia, even she is over 80 years old. She has written a lot about Wittgenstein and that has helped her to express her view of the topic. Although she, like Wittgenstein,  has lived in a hut in Norway - and actually brought Tractatus with hes - she seems to be different and for sure more glad than W. Anyways, its W: s writings that interests her and especially his critics of metaphysics and ethics in philosophy. As it is said in Tractacus  : " Whereof one  cannot speak , thereof one must be silent." And of ethics philosophy should not speak - why? Is it like in Buddhism - its better to sit in silence and let know yourself, than to speculate about what will happen when we die? But for sure there ethical guidelines in Buddhism,  but the behaviors is often named skilful, not good (or bad). Another
Read more

I think, therefore I am NOT

Image
So Descartes was wrong. He said that he could doubt everything about himself except that he was thinking. That proved that he existed. The word "I" is the central point here. What does it mean? Perhaps we are sure that we know the answer. Is it the thoughts? In that case - where are you when you aren't thinking? Is it your job, your title? In that case - what happens if you loose your job or change job? Is it your house, your nation? Under my course to be a mindfulness instructor, the teacher, Ola Schenström, made us ask to each other; "Who are you?" After each answer the question was repeated by the questioner.We soon discovered that there were no end to the answers - or maybe an adequate end could be; "I don't know."Or maybe; "It seems I have no essence." Other thinkers have come to the same conclusions; Buddha, Sartre and more recently Damasio and Parfit. Sartre, for instance, has said that we are the sum of our actions. We ha
Read more

Wittgenstein and Buddha -buddies?

Image
Ludwig Wittgenstein, the famous philosopher, reflected in the posthumously published  book "Philosophical Investigations" about the picture above; Is it a hare or duck?  He meant that we make, or must make, a statement what it is. And I suppose he meant that we often or always has to interpret the world around us. But two different interpretations can both be right! Language and thoughts controls what we see.....   You can compare with the picture of a glass. Half empty or half empty?  Who decides? Yes, it's you... And whatever you say is right.  But you can be aware of what you think. That can say more of yourself than of the glass....  You can be aware of that you always do interpretations of things that happens.  If you have a pessimistic or a naive point of view, you can be aware of the view and your statements.  Buddha and Wittgenstein were both aware of that different persons uses different perspectives.  But Buddha spoke about the "right 
Read more