Have you ever been told by others when you are confused that "confusion is good" or have you ever told someone who is confused that "confusion is good"? Probably. The rationale is confusion shows that you know enough to actually recognise conflicting ideas and unclarity and it could indicate the beginning of knowledge. And if you know nothing about the subject, there will absolutely be no ground for confusion and thus no chance for learning to take place.
Wednesday, January 25, 2006
Thursday, January 19, 2006
Inspiration & Paradox 35: Wish to change the wish to change
A couple of days ago, this TV host contester was asked “if there is one thing that you could wish that you could change in your life, what would that be?” His answer was original and unexpected – “it would be the wish to change the wish that he could change something in his life.” The whole beauty and glory about life itself is that it could never be repeated. Yes, he felt that there would always be some regrets in life, but instead of wishing he could do it all over again, he would rather think of how to face the consequences of those regrets.
I thought the way this guy has put his response across was quite interesting.
I thought the way this guy has put his response across was quite interesting.
Tuesday, January 17, 2006
Inspiration & Paradox 34: Office workspace and Creativity level
Probably you might hear this kind of argument before when people in the office start to debate over whether work space should be improved to crank up the creative tempo in the organisation -- If we already enjoy a thriving creative culture, we really don’t need to talk about wrecking our brains in giving special space for creative work. If, on the other hand, creativity is not an integral part of your culture, this sort of workspace will then not be needed to contribute to a more creative organization. Question to this paradox then is: So when do we really need creative work space?
Friday, January 13, 2006
Inspiration & Paradox 33: Can you ask what you do not know?
I am pretty sure that you can identify with me this problem-- whenever people blame us for not taking the iniative to ask or clarify with others about a matter and hence not being able to contribute to the final resolution of the issue, we sometimes can't help but to protest "how am I supposed to ask about anything when I do not know anything??!!"
Thursday, January 12, 2006
Inspiration & Paradox 32: Have you ever had the feeling of being so finite in this infinite world?
When I was not even a teenager, I mused a lot over my existence in this world and state of my existence. The fact that I actually existed as part of this amazing universe then overwhelmed me a lot, so much so that I felt that that my being was so small, insignificant and even absurd. I was very sure that if I were to just disappear in a split second from the surface of this earth, it wouldn't mean anything at all to this world. Trying to put dimension to my existence in this universe made me feel trapped and imprisoned. The deep consciousness and the fullness related to the acknowledgment of my finite existence was overpowering and actually caused me to feel that I was but an empty shell that is just a micro bit part of the infinite universe.
Friday, January 06, 2006
Inspiration & Paradox 31: Motion is an illusion?
Have you heard of the famous Zeno's Paradoxes which have interesting arguments about motion?
The first one I know is called the Dichotomy Paradox. Basically it says that if you want to get to a point that is say, 100 meters away, you must first get to the 50-meter mark, and to reach that, the you have to complete 25 meters. But to do that, you must first finish 12.5 meters, and so on and so forth. Since space is infinitely divisible, we can repeat these 'requirements' forever. Thus you have to reach an infinite number of 'midpoints' in a finite time. This is impossible, so you can never reach his destination.
Another one is known as the Arrow Paradox: A flying arrow at any given time has a certain position, and so does a motionless arrow. The question then is: which arrow then is actually moving?
The first one I know is called the Dichotomy Paradox. Basically it says that if you want to get to a point that is say, 100 meters away, you must first get to the 50-meter mark, and to reach that, the you have to complete 25 meters. But to do that, you must first finish 12.5 meters, and so on and so forth. Since space is infinitely divisible, we can repeat these 'requirements' forever. Thus you have to reach an infinite number of 'midpoints' in a finite time. This is impossible, so you can never reach his destination.
Another one is known as the Arrow Paradox: A flying arrow at any given time has a certain position, and so does a motionless arrow. The question then is: which arrow then is actually moving?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)