There's absolutely no rhyme or reason as to why I should be here. Not metaphorically. Not literally. Not essentially. Not existentially. Nothing.
I have had my doubts about future for quite some time now. The previously optimistic utopian soul, corrupted easily by a simple glance of reality. Not even the morbid ones, just ones not par to my expectation. I'm not who I think I am, and I don't think I will ever know who I really am.
In science there's this thing called model theory. It stated that model is how we collectively perceive the natural state of reality. Some philosophers might argue that our brain capability is limited, our senses easily fooled, and we might never perceive reality as it actually is given our limitations. As far as models are concerned, it doesn't matter if the explanation is ontologically 'objects as it is' or not; if it works, it works, and it is to be accepted. Unless there's a better model developed, of course.
An example of this is the model of atom. We all have probably seen illustration of an atom being a bunch of nuclei particles grouped together in the middle, then surrounded by electrons moving in orbits. This is Niels Bohr's atomic model, and as fun and easy it is to think of atoms this way, it had been discovered that it's not entirely precise. Theory of quantum physics came along and it had been established that atomic constituents - electron, proton, and neutron - don't retain the round, deterministic shape. Instead, they take form as both particle and waves - which are practically not visible to human eyes - making the previously conversation-friendly form of atom resembling that of our solar system becomes far more complicated, only sufficiently represented by intricate constants and fragile probability.
Of course, the real question now is: does model theory also work on perceiving people or only for tangible phenomena generally studied in natural science?
My personal answer is yes. If humankind had been having difficulties in comprehending the seemingly perceivable things such as the planets and atoms that they need to develop a mental model, why wouldn't they do it for even more complex phenomena concerning human and their extremely unpredictable behavior?
For the longest time, like it or not, I have been developing positivistic view towards life. I believe that everything is quantifiable to some extent. Laziness? Inertia. Personal opinion? Brain waves. Love? Chemical reaction. Chaos? Entropy. Rather than two sides of the same coin of human perspective, I treat this view as truth. But of course, this is misleading.
This thought only arise because I've been living as the golden pioneering child of the new milennia. Just like communism wouldn't have worked without technological advent in information that enabled centralization (spoiler alert - it's still not working), positive attitude towards the power of quantification wouldn't have been enabled without engineering advancement and rise of silicon brain. Right now each of us own a powerful gadget on the back of our pocket, capable of measuring the surrounding temperature, locating our precise coordinate, all the while sending signal waves to connect us with people from the other side of the world.
It becomes a problem when this perspective is treated as the mere truth to life. Scientists most probably will argue that empirical evidence and proper experiments are the way to the ultimate truth. Sadly, even the brightest of thinkers will still somehow drive towards a brick wall. What if we encounter this one thing we seemingly can't measure? Is it then proven as nonexistent? Or is it just that we haven't found a way to figure out how to measure it?
What is consciousness?
It's been the mystery at the bottom of science for quite a while now. As the consensus of human behavior can be explained through the tracing of chemical traits flow in the brain, consciousness seems to be closing in to something akin to a mere myth. There's no 'deeper meaning' to our existence; it's just chemical loss and gain. Consciousness does not exist. We have no 'central core' to our thoughts and beliefs.
This notion, just like relationship, requires compromise. I personally still deny this sudden accusation that we have no essence as a humankind; nothing that sets us apart from animals. My rigid belief on quantification that supposed to support this idea seems contradictory to my spiritual health. I'm at a crossroad. I compromise towards the concept that this 'consciousness' thing is inquantifiable. The 'symptom' is measurable, but the 'cause' itself is beyond our sensible explanation. I want to make peace with the notion that not everything is measurable - maybe not yet, maybe not ever. Maybe the time where it would make sense is not now, maybe not ever. Perhaps it's something beyond our organic brain's limitation - just like trying to imagine a 10th dimension or seeing electromagnetic waves outside the visible spectrum.
It's always such a blast to think about metaphysical wonders like this, but I'm afraid this is only a modern-time exercise in futility. The daydream of millenial culture. The masturbatory ego of cognitive exhibition. It's easy to point fingers at people who think like this (me) and remark to them (me), "Who cares?"
The answer, my friend, is "Nobody."
No one cares about this writing. No one cares about how I as a member of society spend my Monday night stargazing upon the pollution-ridden urban sky. No one cares about your pessimistic take on life unless they're your equally pathetic friend. No one cares about our future as humankind other than those who attempted to shape it. And the universe certainly doesn't give a damn about us.
There's no reason for any of us to be here. But who cares? You're still here anyway. Might as well make it fun and worthy while you're at it.
No comments:
Post a Comment