Looking Within-Cosmos and Paradigms Collide

Cosmos
Originally uploaded by michaelrice1982.

To All,
Well, it’s just one of those really great nights. Everyday I spend here at Texas State I seem to fall more in love with the University and the people out here. I feel more strongly with every passing day that I did indeed make the right choice to relocate and I am so thankful to be out here. It’s a good place to be in and I am very thankful. Time is of the essence, however, so I’ll move on to a thought I recently had. So this will be a brief exercise in cognitive dexterity and the event: philosophical theology. Or something like that. Hmmmm.
Often times I hear the most puzzling statement made by people who feel the answer to the big questions in life is that “There must be something out there.” It is indeed a very enticing notion, and this view is easily justified by elaborating that there is so much infinite space in the cosmos and heavens that it must prove there is something more. It does seem as though space is quiet big and some astronomical theorists postulate that space is in a constant state of doubling itself. But then again, that is a theory and relaying the realities of the cosmos with certainty can be troublesome. Take for instance Stephen Hawking, who recently conceded that the repudiations made by his colleagues and skeptics alike were true in regards to his theory on black holes. Essentially, he said he was wrong. So if we synthesize the conflicting views of just how big the cosmos are we still will come to the conclusion that, yes, there is a lot of space out there. It’s a valid point and I agree.
My question is, however, why is the opposite not ever said? On the contrary to the fickle nature of math and science surrounding the possibly infinite nature of space, it is a mathematical fact that any thing can be divided infinitely. To put this idea into more graspable terms, it’s like dividing any number. For example, the number one can be divided by two infinitely. It was a very challenging concept for me to initially accept, and I remember vividly my reluctance to accept this fact; I was in the kitchen with my parents about 10 years ago or so. But ultimately I grasped it, as much as anyone can anyways. So the idea here is simple: people have a natural tendency to point to the cosmos as a reason to believe there must be something out there due to its seemingly infinite nature. But this has not been proven and I imagine never will be with certainty. Conversely, we can say with certainty that if we go the opposite way of bigger, that is to say smaller, there is certain infiniteness. The obvious implication of this is that we may not have to look farther than ourselves. Of course I could be wrong. I’ve been wrong before.
I’ve been studying the idea of linguistics and how the critical role that it plays in the development of our consciousness and how it certainly limits and controls our thoughts. After all, we do not think in abstract ideas in a stream of consciousness, unbound by words. Instead we are limited by our particular vocabulary and lexicon. Linguistics is a fascinating branch of anthropology and could go on… But all I mean is that in our particular society, in which bigger is often associated with being better, it becomes abundantly clear why such a mentality of looking out rather than in is preferable and more seemingly natural. I’m not being quiet clear on this, but hopefully it makes some sense and I don’t need to extrapolate any further. Maybe next time, but I’m only allotted about 20 minutes for this post and I’m on 19, so I have to get up to Cru. Tonight is ultimate frisbee-you have to prioritize in life!
So until next time, I remain, rushed as ever,
Michael W. Rice

Quote for the day:
There is more in the heavens and earth than our religions or philosophies have ever dreamed.