Do we honor or challenge the status quo?
/
“When something really bad is going on in culture, the average guy doesn’t see it. He can’t. He’s average and is surrounded and immersed in the can’t and discourse of the status quo.”
Two major forces have dominated our collective psyche. If it’s not religion determining our understanding of the universe it’s science. Both should be challenged. Challenging and questioning any form of authority doesn’t mean I know better. It means I remain open to other possibilities. It means I am curious as to the possibility that humans are in search of understanding and our understanding of the universe is constantly evolving as we discover more. To me, this constant evolution means, there is always more to explore, discover and learn. Sitting back and embracing what we know today as infinite fact, negates curiosity and exploration. It negates evolution.
Both science and religion bring great value to society in very different ways. They often time’s contradict and challenge each other.
Is science becoming the new religion, in the sense that we are supposed to believe because somebody said so??? As a creative I have trouble subscribing to any one belief as infinite fact. Evolution and innovation have only happened by challenging what we already believe.
If science were infinite fact (as many claim it is), then wouldn't ALL scientists always arrive at the same conclusion??? That's not the case, and those who back science, simply back the scientists whose theories align with their beliefs. That's it... sounds like religion... my god is better than yours/my scientists are better than yours. Furthermore, these authorities are trained and educated by the same established standards, which is limiting. Is it really the moon that effects the tides? Is it true that nothing travels faster than the speed of light? How fast does a thought or consciousness travel? Once upon a time, the atom was deemed as the smallest possible particle. We believed it because that’s what we were told. However, it wasn’t the truth. It was only truth in accordance with what we knew and believed at the time.
Science is a very logical and intelligent explanation of the universe based on what has been perceived/observed at the time the theory/thesis was created. These theories/hypotheses change with new information... so how can fact, change?
Is/was Pluto ever a planet... oh wait... it isn't... oh, it is?
Cholesterol is bad... no it's good... only certain types... oh wait? View hilarious video!!!!
Cigarettes were once scientifically backed to relieve stress!
Lobotomies were once the medical science of the day... hmmmmmm!
Science is not synomous with fact. It is only the application of current knowledge. Furthermore, science has always been funded by people with agendas who promote a specific narrative based on research and "facts"... scientists also have personal agendas (Mr. Evil).
Everything should be challenged and questioned IMO. Nothing should be blindly accepted as fact because somebody says so. This does not mean I know more or better than... I remain open to the possibility that humans haven't yet figured out how everything works. We fill in the blanks to make some sense of it all... which doesn't equate to fact.
I invite you to read my book, THINK LIKE AN ARTIST. It’s in part about looking at things differently with a mind as open as it could possible be. As a result, so much changes. It’s about being infinitely curious and open-minded.
“The important thing is not to stop questioning. Curiosity has its own reason for existing. One cannot help but be in awe when he contemplates the mysteries of eternity, of life, of the marvelous structure of reality. It is enough if one tries merely to comprehend a little of this mystery every day.”
My "thesis" has zero scientific merit... it is only philosophical (not theological) in nature, and therefore not fact or gospel, but simply opinion. I reserve my right/freedom to have an opinion... as should you. Now that's a fact right therrrr!
Vital Germaine