Pasta or Pizza? |
We can
probably all relate to the following experience: There are five minutes left in
a sports game (soccer, hockey, what-have-you) and your favorite team is ahead
by a goal.
You are anxiously looking at the clock hoping that your team is going to pull through with a win. A lot can happen in that five-minute interval, so you hold your breath. The seconds winding down feel like an eternity, and you wish you could move their hands more quickly to end the game and secure the much-desired win!
You are anxiously looking at the clock hoping that your team is going to pull through with a win. A lot can happen in that five-minute interval, so you hold your breath. The seconds winding down feel like an eternity, and you wish you could move their hands more quickly to end the game and secure the much-desired win!
Now let’s
switch and flip around the whole experience for argument’s sake. There are
still five minutes left in the game, yet in this scenario your favorite team is
behind a goal.
Now anything can happen in that time interval as well, but the problem is five minutes that seemed an eternity in the first case now are flowing and flying by much too fast. You do not want to speed up time but would like to grab and tie its hands and stop it from moving further so that your team will be given enough time to score that essential and vital equalizing goal!
Now anything can happen in that time interval as well, but the problem is five minutes that seemed an eternity in the first case now are flowing and flying by much too fast. You do not want to speed up time but would like to grab and tie its hands and stop it from moving further so that your team will be given enough time to score that essential and vital equalizing goal!
The constant
of both situations is the time interval. In each case, we are allotting the
same amount of time. Although time is relative, as suggested and proven by
Einstein, it is still quite relatively constant and the same (at least on
planet Earth) whether you are cheering for Team A or Team B. The only
difference lies in our perception of time.
This, of
course, is not merely limited to sports events. As a rule, any event that
thrills us or brings us joy will make time fly and go too fast for our intents
and purposes, whereas dreaded events seem to move at a painstakingly slow pace.
The boring class that seemingly will never end; the work shift that is taking
an eternity to wrap up and finish. In either case, objectively we are faced
with the same amount and length of time, but subjectively, we experience time
quite differently.
Yet our
scientific view of things demands us to be objective in our observations. We
say that regardless of the personal experience of time, the data that can be
measured is exactly the same / identical for each scenario. That is a fact.
In the same vein,
science needs quantifiable information: Today’s temperature of the weather is
25 degrees Celsius (or its equivalent 77 degrees in Fahrenheit). That may feel
warm to you if you live in cooler climates or feel cool to you when you are
accustomed to living in warmer and more tropical regions. Yet the exact
measurable degree gives us and sets a benchmark to gauge the level of heat at
that moment in time.
Or does it?
This may take us to the medical sciences. There we have a disease that can be
objectively diagnosed through specific tests, be it a blood test, urine sample
or an X-ray. Based on the evidence, a person either has a disease or not. A
doctor unlike an economist or even weather forecaster is not there to speculate
nor to give us odds and probabilities whether a patient has a disease or not.
We need scientific data or proof to corroborate the diagnosis.
The problem
with this is that a given disease may be the same, but the personal experience of
the disease is going to be quite different. Put differently, if a hundred
persons have the exact same disease, its impact - that is the amount and
strength of suffering, affliction, pain threshold etc. - is going to vary - at
times rather substantially - from person to person and case to case. This
experience, namely how ill the disease makes a person feel, is referred to as
illness.
There are
people who have a certain disease, but are not aware of it as they do not feel
unwell, while others react to it rather strongly. This may depend on many
factors, including the genetic, physical, and psychological make-up, the
person’s life experiences as well as their ethnic and cultural background. No
two people are ever alike, and their response to medication and treatment will
also vary, which is why even medical sciences cannot always give us the clear
quantifiable data we would like to obtain.
To complicate
matters, there are many cases that are deemed functional neurological disorders
or are diagnosed as conversion disorders, which are rather psychosomatic
ailments that do not correspond nor can be traced to an organic cause.
People may
suffer from pain or even paralysis in parts of their body without having a
physical cause; rather their illness is stemming from often subconscious
psychological issues or trauma. The book It’s All in your Head by neurologist Suzanne O’Sullivan, which has also
graciously and inadvertently provided some of the background medical
information of my post here, gives insightful and detailed explanations of such
cases.
But for our
intents and purposes, we want to suggest and highlight that certain scientific
data should be taken with a grain of salt. I am not saying that we should consider the
clearly ludicrous notion that the earth is flat (it is not). But in the past, learned people claimed with stern conviction that this was so, and they
have been later proven wrong with science. Now this shows us that supposed certainty
does not necessarily mean that one’s view is or will continue to be correct.
No better way
to prove this than with quantum mechanics. Suddenly, we are faced with dilemmas
in which our regular understanding of the world is shredded and falls to
pieces. Is Schrödinger’s cat dead? Yes. But can it be alive? Yes. Is it
possible for it to be both alive and dead at the same time? Um, yes, it could
be in a zombie state until the box is opened, which is the only time we would
know for sure. Are you sure about that? Absolutely.
This is a
time where objectivity does not give us the distance that we need to define and
verify events. Light can be both a wave and a particle depending on how you
look at it; it is not an issue of P or not-P, but it can be both at the same
time! In this case, the subject becomes so involved and enmeshed with the
object itself that one cannot simply
be without the other! Put differently, they are as interconnected and
intricately linked with each other as space is with time in the indivisible
form of space-time, which, after all, happens to be not linear but curved.
In these
instances, our logic seems to go out the window, and we may come to the
uncomfortable realization that time and everything else for that matter is
nothing but an illusion. The objects and colors we perceive then are nothing
but atoms that move sometimes more or sometimes less quickly. The absolute kind
of truth that we expect of Newtonian physics as well as the razor-sharp
stiletto of logic will have to take a backseat for a moment due to the
discoveries of the uncertainty principle since electrons and atoms disregard
those rules and laws.
But there is
a way out of this entangled mess. As humans we have always been prone to adapt
to our surroundings and as humble and open-minded scientists we are generally quick
to assimilate and respond to constantly changing circumstances. This does not
mean that our previous scientific knowledge and discoveries are wrong (they are
not) but there is still a factor we have been queasy about and that is the
element of subjectivity.
Any human
being no matter how well-trained and accomplished cannot escape their own subjective
viewpoints and biases. And let us not treat it as a negative thing but actually
embrace it. Let us rethink science and not see it as distancing the object from
the subject but combine both in a mystical dance, where I lose myself in the
flower I am contemplating and examining, and I am the flower and the flower is
me.
Let us use
our subjective capacity and empathy to identify ourselves with the object in
question instead of carefully extricating and distancing ourselves from it. Let
us consider - as it has been occurring in psychology – the person that comes to
consult the therapist less as a patient but more as a client or agent who can
benefit from the doctor’s knowledge, the same way the doctor can benefit from
this interdependent interaction.
This is what
could be called the Quantum metaphor. One can apply this mystical uncertain
certainty as a union between object and subject, interior and exterior, self
and not-self to create a new perspective or paradigm of the world around us.
It can be
applied to anything from sciences, philosophy, politics to religion as well as
daily life. When there is no definite yes-or-no answer or truth, one can see
the world with different eyes. There is no good or evil per se but often
changing circumstances. An immoral act of stealing or lying may be justifiable and
even commendable in certain situations.
Let us listen
to the other, our supposed enemy or threat and see them not in the biased and
one-sided Us vs Them mentality, but let us notice the common ground that we
share despite our perceived differences. Yes, we can have a love-hate
relationship with someone and that is not necessarily a contradiction in and of
itself.
I am not
merely saying that one should inundate oneself with positive thinking. This is
not merely a glass half-full, half-empty metaphor. In fact, positive thinking
can do us more harm than good in some cases. Nor am I talking about pure
rationalism that would justify philosophical trends like utilitarianism where
the benefit of the majority supposedly can override the suffering of the few.
The quantum
metaphor would simply allow us to think of the world less in a divisive way; it
is not just about me versus them or my self versus the external world but
rather a unity where both joyously complement each other, where harm to my
neighbor will, in return, harm me as well. The quantum metaphor would also help
us curb our hubris and overreaching ambition in which we may allow ourselves
not only to be wrong on certain matters, but to even contradict ourselves and
our stern principles when the situation requires us to do so.
To exemplify
this in another way, let us look at language and experience. For example,
anxiety is something we try to avoid as we see it as a negative emotion and experience.
But we would be wrong to do so.
Anxiety not unlike pain is giving us signals
that something is up and that this something needs our attention. It points us
towards a problem or issue that exists within us. Instead of avoiding it, we
should embrace it and follow it and see where it leads us, the same way we do
not ignore pain as it is alerting us to fix a health issue in our body.
Equally, the
adjective anxious can be perceived in two contradictory manners. I can feel
anxious in its negative nervous sense or I can be anxious for something to
happen as an expected thrill or as a sudden rush and onset of emotions. Or I
can simply be anxious for my team to win with only five more minutes left in
the game.
No comments:
Post a Comment