Does the analytic mind destroy a sense of wonder?

  • Thread starter Thread starter InJesusItrust
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I

InJesusItrust

Guest
This is something that I have been wondering for a while. I believe that most can’t accept Catholic sexual morality because humanity’s view of what makes one human has changed. For example instead of seeing a human as having organs, biology may give of the idea that a bunch of organs happen to work together to make a human. The whole becomes nothing more than the sum of the parts.

For example, some people believe that life can start by just mixing a few chemical compounds and striking it with energy. But when people die, can we measure the animation energy of a living creature leave? What is a heart transplant if humans are nothing more than organs? Are there two humans living inside one body?
 
As a mathematician, I think it is fair to say I have an analytic mind. Science may have figured out that we have parts and biochemical responses to stimuli, etc. I have no problem with this. It does not answer, however, whether or not we are able to make decisions for ourselves. If your brain is simply reacting to a series of impulses, then why can we decide against our better judgement? Why do we feel torn about certain decisions? We can say it’s a result of the brain discerning what the best answer is, but there isn’t really any proof in that statement. It’s a hypothesis that hasn’t really been tested. Clearly I believe it is a false hypothesis, and that we all have a soul (and therefore our own will) that is transcendent of the body. Part of the challenge is that our soul battles with our physical desires.
 
hazcompat said:
No

1=0.99999999999999999

Peace
Click to expand...
Noooooo - 0.99999999999999999 is approximately 1, but it is not the same number. In fact, the universe could not exist if any one of the constants that govern it differed by even 1/10^50 places. (0.00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001) How is that for a sense of wonder? Such a small change and we wouldn’t even exist! The point is, math is objective, not subjective.
 
RedFox0456 said:
Noooooo - 0.99999999999999999 is approximately 1, but it is not the same number. In fact, the universe could not exist if any one of the constants that govern it differed by even 1/10^50 places. (0.00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001) How is that for a sense of wonder? Such a small change and we wouldn’t even exist! The point is, math is objective, not subjective.
Click to expand...
Perhaps. Let me wonder for an atto-second and get back to you in a parsec.

Peace
 
Analytic vs Wonder

.Scene between me and my nephew at age 9:

Me: Look at the beautiful moon tonight! It’s like a big orange ball coming up out of the bay–

Nephew: The moon does not come up. It appears to come up, since the earth, spinning on its axis in relation to the moon which orbits around the earth…

And never the twain shall meet.
 
I’d have to say yes. I know being analytical reduced my enjoyment of movies. Back in the days before CGI, there would be some kind of effect on screen and rather than accepting it as part of the story, I’d be thinking, how did they do that?
 
DaveBj said:
I’d have to say yes. I know being analytical reduced my enjoyment of movies. Back in the days before CGI, there would be some kind of effect on screen and rather than accepting it as part of the story, I’d be thinking, how did they do that?
Click to expand...
Didn’t you see each quatum contribute to pixels creating hues? Wonderful! Wonderful!

Peace
 
No.

I have an analytic mind and when I grow up, I want to be Mary Poppins. 😃
 
Auntie_A said:
Analytic vs Wonder

.Scene between me and my nephew at age 9:

Me: Look at the beautiful moon tonight! It’s like a big orange ball coming up out of the bay–

Nephew: The moon does not come up. It appears to come up, since the earth, spinning on its axis in relation to the moon which orbits around the earth…

And never the twain shall meet.
Click to expand...
This is the kind of thing that I am thinking of.
 
No.
from my perspective A properly educated mind should be able to bring an analytic approach to a sense of wonder and vice-versa.

some people have the attitude that the two are mutually exclusive. I find that mind-set hard to comprehend.

In Aunty-A’s example I think the case is typified. Of course Aunty-A has recieved a modern western education, and knows how the sun moon and planets revolve… but that does not stop her wondering at the beauty of the percieved experience of a beautiful sunset or moon-rise.

her 9-year-old nephew has the mind of a child where everything is Black or White. grey areas are not comprehensible to the pre-pubescent mind.
There is a push in the move to secularism and relitivism to divorce Wonder from the analytic mind - but that will never produce people with the passion to explore. The passion to explore comes from a deep seated wonder combined with an analytic mind.

Google “Professor Brian Cox”. He’s a program maker for BBC science (and a University professor).
He is an excellent example of someone who can simultaneously portray both the scientific understanding in Lay-mans terms while retaining and communicating the sence of wonder at the beauty and complexity of creation.

(just don’t expect him to be teaching the Truth about Faith - that’s not his area of expertise… However I’ve not heard him openly join in with the Dawkins / Hawkins version of “Atheism” that denys God’s existence with a faith like certainty and makes a religion out of science)
 
I remember doing a soccer coaching course a few years back. The guy running it said that we should beware as the deeper we got into the technical aspect of the game, the less we would enjoy it as a spectacle.

I knew hat he meant, but I’ve been able to switch between the two. If I was coaching I looked at the game from a technical viewpoint and if I was watching, then that dry, calculated aspect disappeared completely and I get lost in the the game.

It would be like a surgeon looking at a woman as a collection of bodily parts on the operating table and then looking at a woman in the bar in an entirely different way.

By the way, picky I know, but a parsec is a measure of distance.
 
Bradski said:
I remember doing a soccer coaching course a few years back. The guy running it said that we should beware as the deeper we got into the technical aspect of the game, the less we would enjoy it as a spectacle.

I knew hat he meant, but I’ve been able to switch between the two. If I was coaching I looked at the game from a technical viewpoint and if I was watching, then that dry, calculated aspect disappeared completely and I get lost in the the game.

It would be like a surgeon looking at a woman as a collection of bodily parts on the operating table and then looking at a woman in the bar in an entirely different way.

By the way, picky I know, but a parsec is a measure of distance.
Click to expand...
In astronomical terms, it is equal to 3.26 light-years, and in scientific terms it is equal to 3.09×1013 kilometres (1.92×1013 miles).

Peace
 
Read part of St. Thomas’s Summa, then the lyrics to one of his Eucharistic hymns. I think few men had either the analytic powers or the sense of wonder he had.
 
Does the analytic mind destroy a sense of wonder?
Click to expand...
Definitely not according to Albert Einstein who said such things as…

“And everybody should be ashamed who uses the wonders of science and engineering without thinking and having mentally realized not more of it than a cow realizes of the botany of the plants which it eats with pleasure.”

and…

*“There are only two ways to live your life. One is as though nothing is a miracle. The other is as though everything is a miracle.” *

🙂
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top