What is and What can be
Realization by knowledge v/s realization by experience are two aspects of human approach.
All knowledge that exists in real world is generally generated by the humans and defined by humans by observing what exists in nature and beyond. But the domain of abstract i.e. that which is beyond what exists is always interesting. So the mild diversion between what exists and what can exist depends on what we think and how we think about it.
So is all knowledge that exists wrong?
I believe and have experienced it myself that simultaneous thinking does exist. When we say that a particular entity can generate a thought the same thought can exist or may have been thought over.
So why then is creativity considered beyond what exists always. Cant innovation by looking at a new perspective of the existing change the way the world sees itself?
Knowledge that exists and knowledge that goes beyond existence should be equally balanced.
An individual that says existing knowledge is of no concern to reality than it shows that individuals should not evolve. For evolution the balance between knowing what is and what can be needs to be maintained.
Not only that what we experience is true but also that which we cannot experience but someone else has experienced needs to be true.
If only self experience is going to be the key towards making society exist then the world would exist without a society.
Understanding for design then I believe needs to balance between what is and what can be. And using what is allows you to know what exists but it can be challenged by what can be which in turn allows you to look beyond what exists but not canceling what is always or not straying away from what exists.
I may not be a philosopher neither a world renowned designer…. But this is what I think.
Any comments?
All knowledge that exists in real world is generally generated by the humans and defined by humans by observing what exists in nature and beyond. But the domain of abstract i.e. that which is beyond what exists is always interesting. So the mild diversion between what exists and what can exist depends on what we think and how we think about it.
So is all knowledge that exists wrong?
I believe and have experienced it myself that simultaneous thinking does exist. When we say that a particular entity can generate a thought the same thought can exist or may have been thought over.
So why then is creativity considered beyond what exists always. Cant innovation by looking at a new perspective of the existing change the way the world sees itself?
Knowledge that exists and knowledge that goes beyond existence should be equally balanced.
An individual that says existing knowledge is of no concern to reality than it shows that individuals should not evolve. For evolution the balance between knowing what is and what can be needs to be maintained.
Not only that what we experience is true but also that which we cannot experience but someone else has experienced needs to be true.
If only self experience is going to be the key towards making society exist then the world would exist without a society.
Understanding for design then I believe needs to balance between what is and what can be. And using what is allows you to know what exists but it can be challenged by what can be which in turn allows you to look beyond what exists but not canceling what is always or not straying away from what exists.
I may not be a philosopher neither a world renowned designer…. But this is what I think.
Any comments?
Comments