|
|
#1 |
|
FFR Player
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 256
|
Understanding: a way of seeing
Know is see. Understand is grasp. These are rather common metaphors. Such metaphors help us comprehend. Empathy is a technique for understanding. We can try to understand another person by creating a means whereby we can ‘walk a mile in her shoes’. We can create analogies of what the other person experiences as a means for us to ‘put on their shoes’. An artist may paint in the manner of Picasso, or perhaps in the manner of a Rembrandt, or perhaps in the manner of a Monet. These different forms of painting represent different ways of seeing. They represent a personal understanding which provides us with a prism for seeing. Mathematics is a way of seeing. Mathematics is the science of pattern. Imagine a very elaborate Persian rug. Imagine that you have only a small fragment of that rug. Mathematics offers a means whereby you might be able to construct the rest of that rug to look exactly like the original. Math can perhaps create a formula for the pattern in the rug such that you can, by following that math formula, exactly duplicate the pattern from which that rug was created. Understanding is a stage of comprehension whereby a person can interject them self into the pattern through imagination. ‘Understanding is math’ because it helps the individual to ‘walk in the shoes’ of some other entity. Understanding might correctly, in my opinion, be considered to be a personal paradigm. Knowledge is about truth but understanding is about meaning. Understanding is a means for placing the individual within the picture including the entity about which the individual wishes to become very familiar. Understanding is a creative process that extends knowing. Understanding may or may not enhance the truth quality of comprehension. Picasso and Monet may paint the same object but have they captured the truth of that object.? Is truth anything beyond what is normally considered to be truth? Is truth anything beyond what humans have normalized (standardized)? Does understanding aid or deter normalization? Are you normal? Would you rather be normal than right? Dare to be abnormal, but not foolish! |
|
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
FFR Player
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 43
|
You say, does understanding deter or aid normalization?
Normal is just an opinion, but an opinion doesn't change the facts, and the facts are what are understood, not opinions. I don't think understanding would change opinion at all, when it comes to your favorite color or song. But it would effect your morals witch are like opinions. But do morals have anything to do with normality? I think morals have to do with difference, like the difference between right and wrong yet moral sees no normal, it has no use for seeing some things as normal. Now I get what you are saying (i'm still leaving that up there), you mean will people understanding things better make them become in-common? Well some things will become more common and some things will become less common. Some people need different things than other people, so they will go and chase their unique goal, or in other words everyone will chase the yin to their yang, or vice versa. But by being more common with one thing you only become less common with other things. So the world will never be more unified or more separated, it will always be balanced between the two. Unless the world is applied to a center. Like every thing's opposite is on the opposite side of the center. Then if something gets into the center would have no opposite, but if the universe is unlimited then you could never get into the center perfectly, and would always have an opposite. So in that case, you can become more common, but you will always have differences with others. But then if things got closer to the center we would probably over sensitize ourselves, and even though we may see someone as centered now, if everyone else became more centered than them, they would see them as more off-center. Plus the universe is sorta based off centers, but there are a lot of centers that revolve around their own larger centers. If the universe is unlimited than we could never find the true center and would never really be able to find the true normal. Some normals cancel out the possibilities of other normals because of this set up. For example, two animals could be opposite animals, but animals are still opposite of plants, so those opposite animals are not universal opposites. If the universe is unlimited than it would be impossible to find universal opposites. Last edited by 9_ki_kid; 07-7-2007 at 04:14 PM.. |
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
FFR Player
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 256
|
Normal is local. Normality in California is differnt from normal in Ohio. Normal in San Francisco is different from normal in Las Angeles. Normal in China Town is different from normal other neighborhoods. Normal is a way of seeing. Understanding is a way of seeing. Understanding is about normality and about abnormality.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Very Grave Indeed
|
"Normal" is that which is evident in the majority for whatever your sample size happens to be.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
FFR Player
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: lost, but not hopeless
Age: 28
Posts: 95
|
truth is definitely EVERYTHING beyond what we humans in our stupid world have made it to be. theres one truth that knows everything that is right and is REALLY the truth. but we sin. we've lost sight of that truth.
as of my being normal, i highly doubt it. maybe here and there, but i know im definitely not right either. i admit, im a hypocrite and definitely abnormal to the maxx ^.^ |
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
FFR Hall of Fame
|
![]()
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
(The Fat's Sabobah)
|
sup coberst.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
FFR Player
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: FL
Posts: 10
|
My thoughts on the meaning of understanding it to assign a meaning or symbol to something so that we can visually grasp a concept.
Last edited by RJC50000; 07-20-2007 at 01:35 AM.. Reason: Corrected by Coberst |
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
FFR Player
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 256
|
Concept is a mental category. How does one physically grasp a mental entity? I would assume you were speaking metaphorically except that you used the word physically. One can physically grasp a stone but not a concept. Metaphorically we can grasp a concept. Can you grasp my meaning?
|
|
|
|
![]() |
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|