forked from jackyzha0/quartz
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
Commit
This commit does not belong to any branch on this repository, and may belong to a fork outside of the repository.
- Loading branch information
Showing
2 changed files
with
29 additions
and
13 deletions.
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -1,24 +1,34 @@ | ||
| --- | ||
| "Note Planted:": 2024-06-27 | ||
| "Last Tended:": 2024-11-19 | ||
| {"Note Planted:":"2024-06-27","Last Tended:":"2025-01-07","publish":true,"PassFrontmatter":true} | ||
| --- | ||
| #🌱Seed #🙂Agree | ||
|
|
||
| #🪴Sprout #🙂Agree #🟡Consideration | ||
| **** | ||
| > `Importance`: 30% | ||
| > `Importance`: 50% | ||
| >[!Summary] The Big Idea | ||
| > The basic idea that Western thought has gone too far into relying only on a mechanistic explanation of the universe. A balance needs to be found between being able to see the universe (or any other smaller part of the world) as a unified whole first and foremost. The specifics of how things work mechanistically can be figured out and flow from our core understanding of the whole. | ||
| > The basic idea that Western thought has gone too far into relying only on a mechanistic explanation of the universe. Thinkers like [[Christopher Alexander (Architect, Author)\|Christopher Alexander (Architect, Author)]] suggest a reorientation to seeing the universe as a whole that is itself made of smaller things that are themselves whole (like a human) opening up the ability to see the world as more than just a set of organic machines. | ||
| > | ||
| > The specifics of how things work mechanistically can (and will always be) figured out through science and other research but rather than being the base picture of the world a holistic perspective seeks to understand the universe as flowing out from the core understanding of "the whole." | ||
| > | ||
| > This is in opposition to the usual way of trying to get all of the mechanics figured out so that we can construct an understanding of the whole like an erector set. But the problem with that is if you have even a few bad parts your picture of the whole can get very distorted. Not to mention it also is impossible to judge which mechanics are most faithful unless you see them through which in some cases can cost the effort of a whole generation. | ||
| > This is in opposition to the usual way of trying to get all of the mechanics figured out piece by piece first. Which then is put together like an erector set in order to understand the whole. The problem with only relying on this type of mechanistic perspective is that if you have even a few bad parts your picture of the whole can get very distorted. Not to mention it is also impossible to judge which mechanics are more important or accurate until you have tried them out. Which in some cases dooms whole generations to deal with the consequences of the experiments of their predecessors (think of the early industrial revolution or colonialization, both very effective mechanics but generally not very humane or balanced). | ||
| A metaphor for this is to think of two frogs on a table. One is alive and whole the other is split open and pinned on the board. Which frog gives you a better example of what a frog really is? The dissected frog can teach you a lot about the mechanics of how a frog works internally. But if that is all you ever have access to you never really will have a good idea of what a frog is like or how it sounds or where it lives or any of the other things that makes a frog a frog as a whole created creature. | ||
| A metaphor for this is to think of two frogs on a table. One is alive and whole the other is split open and pinned on the board. Which frog gives you a better example of what a frog really is? The dissected frog can teach you a lot about the mechanics of how a frog works internally. But if that is all you ever have access to you never really will have a good idea of what a frog is like, or how it sounds, or where it lives, or any of the other things that makes a frog "a frog" as a whole created creature. | ||
|
|
||
| Related Notes: [[Structure Preserving Transformation or Smooth Change]], [[Notes on the Nature of Order]], [[The Quality of Life in Environments and Objects]], [[Center Composed Wholeness]], [[The Ways Centers Help Each Other Have More Life]], [[Thinking of Spatial Relationships as Centers]] | ||
| Related Notes: | ||
| [[Structure Preserving Transformation or Smooth Change or Unfolding\|Structure Preserving Transformation or Smooth Change or Unfolding]], | ||
| [[Notes on the Nature of Order\|Notes on the Nature of Order]], | ||
| [[The Quality of Life in Environments and Objects\|The Quality of Life in Environments and Objects]], | ||
| [[Center Composed Wholeness\|Center Composed Wholeness]], | ||
| [[The Ways Centers Help Each Other Have More Life\|The Ways Centers Help Each Other Have More Life]], | ||
| [[Thinking of Spatial Relationships as Centers\|Thinking of Spatial Relationships as Centers]] | ||
| **** | ||
|
|
||
| # Application of this Principle to our Approach to Scripture | ||
| The idea that when we approach Scripture from a mechanistic framework we often view scripture as incomplete. There a details missing or the exact way things mechanically work is not fully explained so we tend to see "gaps" in the text and spend a lot of mental energy trying to rectify or explain them in some form. | ||
| The idea that when we approach Scripture from a mechanistic framework we often view scripture as incomplete. There are details missing or the exact way things mechanically worked (i.e. Where did Cain's wife come from, etc.) is not fully explained so we tend to see "gaps" in the text and spend a lot of mental energy trying to rectify or explain them in some form. | ||
|
|
||
| This often leads to the idea that scripture only gives an overview, or some kind of spiritual perspective, on how the world works not an actual full account of everything we truly need as God's creatures. | ||
|
|
||
| But this then leads to the idea that scripture only really gives an overview or some kind of spiritual perspective on how the world works not an actual full account of everything we truly need as God's creatures. | ||
| I think this has also been supported by historic "fights" between theology and science. The example of Galileo being sentenced to house arrest because of his support of heliocentrism in essence took a narrow mechanistic interpretation of Scripture and pitted it against the observations of a scientist. As scientific methods and equipment advanced it became more and more clear that the dogmatic adherence to geocentricism was untenable and actually false. This opened the door to throwing Scripture out as an account of the universe because it lacks clear definitions of particular mechanics. | ||
|
|
||
| I think that Scripture works from a wholistic standpoint of the human and the universe. We see an accurate and immensely deep and nuanced perspective of everything in scripture. The problem is that if we are looking for the mechanics of everything we won’t find it but if we are looking for a wholistic approach to life and everything, than Scripture and theology already has all we need allowing us to make decisions and choose mechanisms that are in line with our overarching holistic perspective. | ||
| However, I think Scripture works from a holistic standpoint of the human and the universe. We see an accurate and immensely deep and nuanced perspective of everything in Scripture. Morality, the purpose of humanity, etc. are all thoroughly explored and laid out throughout the pages of Scripture. The problems comes if we take this holistic account and expect to find the mechanics of everything. Scripture does not tell you how to make your toast. But it does tell you why you should make toast (to care for yourself or others) or if the way you are making your toast is helpful or not (just use the toaster, the flamethrower is more likely to hurt someone). Scripture and theology already have all we need to teach us how to make decisions and choose between mechanisms to live lives that are in line with our overarching holistic perspective. |