Hey guys, Bo here.
OR AM I?
Yeah, that’s a bad start. Anywho, I’ve been doing some
thinky-thinky on some pretty deep philosophical stuff. I, and probably other
people at some point in time, have felt completely and utterly alone in the
universe. Which doesn’t seem plausible, due to the fact that I am very content
with my level of self-esteem, have a good amount of friends, and generally
enjoy life.
It’s not that I’m alone in the universe on a very poetic and
meta level, it’s just that I might be the only one here who actually exists.
I mean, think about it. We as humans are completely
incapable of adapting the thoughts and conscious actions of other humans. They
can tell us what they’re thinking about or why they’re thinking about it, but
we cannot know if that is the truth or if they’re even real.
The theory is called the Egocentric Predicament. It
basically says that we only know ourselves. Everything that isn’t us isn’t.
It states that we are the universe that we have come to grow
and love, but only by ourselves. You can’t be the universe as well.
It states that we have created everything that we believe
exists with the power of awesomeness. Which to me shows something sublime and
impossibly evil about ourselves; we created cool stuff like penguins and the
internet. But then we also created cancer and malaria.
However, there’s a bit of a paradox that comes with it. We
can only know us, right? Someone else probably thinks the same thing. But if you’re the only one that exists, and I
can think and I can understand, than you’re
not the one, but I am. Meaning that
in your point of view, you’re the
only thing in the universe, but I am,
meaning that you can’t be what you think you are, and vice versa.
And that explanation is pretty much why that theory is often
shunned.
Other, less-firing-a-cannon-at-your-entire-worldview
theories go as follow:
I can see this color and I have been taught that it is
called red. But the color that I have identified as red might be the one that
you would call green, be you in my perspective.
But since you can’t do that, we’ll never know whether you see humans
differently than I see humans. My humans look xyz, but your humans might
look like yzx4rtq81mkulop. However, since I cannot see through your
eyes, and we’ve both been taught that what we think humans look like is truth, we’ll never be able to experience
each other’s perspective.
Okay, maybe that cannoned your brain too. Nonetheless, these
hypotheticals are quite intriguing. They kinda show individuality by not
showing individuality. They show that we can invent the universe but not know
some of the most simple stuff that we created.
If we flunked junior high math, then we must be bad at
universing.
So what do we do to become better at universing? Easy. Don’t flunk junior high math. Or if it’s
too late for that, then learn how to do the things that you were bad at. Better
yet, create a time machine and go back to junior high and study like your
counselor told you to.
My point is that if you, or I, or Donald Trump, or Barney
Fife, might be the human personification of infinity, and you, or I, or Donald
Trump, or Barney Fife got some work to do.
So let’s get universing, Milton.
With love and headcannons,
Bo
(special thanks to VSAUCE’s video “Is anything real?” for
general awesomeness and for providing knowledge to me on the Egocentric
Predicament.)
2 comments:
This one is my favorite yet! Good job Bo.
I think the gist of this theory is that we are each limited to our own perceptual world and views. I gotta get out more. Like John Donne said, " No man is an island." Thanks for making me think ! Andy
Post a Comment