TED Conversations

Dean Lesser

This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »

We Do Not Know Anything!

I wrote a much more detailed and thorough version of what I am about to explain; however, the number of character exceeds the designated limit. The point I would like to make is that since humans have evolved over a short period of time, compared to dinosaurs and many other current species, we have not occupied this universe for very long. The human race is definitely an advanced and wonderful part of existence, but there is one fatal flaw to everything we all know and love. Our lives our perpetuated upon common and fine tuned beliefs made subtly over time. Basically, every single possible thing that we perceive has already been done before and our brains have been trained and made accustomed to those set pieces of knowledge. To clarify, I want you to think of anything in the world, anything at all; it could be an object like a pencil, it could be the color blue, it could even be the plot to a movie. Now every single decision you could have made, every possible choice of anything you could have ever thought of can be traced back to something else that was done before it. What I mean is that the human race evolved and grew through constant repetition with slight altercations every so often until things began to change and eventually new things were created. Once humans had evolved to a point where we were completely adapted to our environments and had control of the land over all the other species, these small changes began expanding on a large scale. These were very small changes but they were happening everywhere, all of the time. To bring this back to my main point, I would like to present to you the idea that everything we have ever known has been done before, slightly changed, then redone a bit differently, SO there is no evidence to prove that we know anything about time and what the universe is. There is no evidence to prove that we even know who or what we are because everything that we have ever learned has been made up by ourselves. We Have No Real Answers.

Topics: The Universe history humans time
+1
Share:
progress indicator
  • thumb

    Marya Zilberberg

    • +1
    Feb 4 2012: This is a fascinating insight -- I often wonder, what do we really know? In fact everything we "know" is really a code, a mental model for what is really going on. Insofar as the model fits what we perceive to be reality, it is a good model. Once it stops fitting, it must be dumped for an alternative explanation. It is the way of knowledge acquisition. But so much has to do with our tools, cognitive and created...

    • Dean Lesser

      • 0
      Feb 7 2012: "Once it stops fitting, it must be dumped for an alternative explanation" very good addition!
  • thumb

    edward long 100+

    • 0
    Jan 24 2012: Do you know for a fact that we do not know anything? If so you have falsified the statement. Remember Mr. Lesser, the absence of proof is not proof of absence (-Anon.). Thanks for sharing.

    • Dean Lesser

      • 0
      Jan 25 2012: You sir are awesome, I literally ran out of room so I could not write anymore in the description box, but you got it! That's exactly my point, we don't know anything, but then that means that I don't know anything, so how can I be right. It's a vicious paradox and it amazes me and I hope it amazes you too
      • thumb

        Xavier Belvemont 30+

        • 0
        Jan 25 2012: .
        Seems to be more 'unfalsifiable model' than a paradox.
        So from my perspective you can't help wondering exactly where and how many times the idea is (potentially) flawed.
        • thumb

          edward long 100+

          • 0
          Jan 25 2012: Allow me one more thought, Mr. Belvemont. If "We" refers to mankind and "know" refers to Justifiable True Beliefs (JTB), then the statement is self-contradicting because it contains a JTB stated by a member of mankind. It is falsified.

    • Dean Lesser

      • 0
      Jan 25 2012: self contradicting definitely classifies it best, I tried explaining this theory to a bunch of people and none of them understood the whole point that what I was saying disproved what I was saying so I am very relieved to see this level of comprehension. However, even though this is technically "falsified", wouldn't you agree that everything we have discovered and came up with has just been the fabrication based on how we perceive the world and everything in it. All these words and concepts and ideas we have made for ourselves are all just based off of the translation of our view of the world. The concept of falsified statements and justifiable beliefs and paradoxes are all things that we have "discovered", but really they are simply the best explanations we have for the certain specific situations that they are applied to. Everything that we deem true and absolute and basically correct is just made that way to fit our lives, because how could we know how to apply something to something else that we have no previous knowledge of. There is no final and absolute answer to prove anything because like I have been saying, we do not know anything 100% because we have created this lifestyle based off of how we experience the world. I guess that might just be enough to live by since it happens to be what works for us, but it really just bothers me that we will never know what anything truly is or why things happen in the manner that they do. Now let me rearrange this statement as "I wish we were able to know everything".
      • thumb

        edward long 100+

        • 0
        Jan 25 2012: Dean, I detect a strong desire for omniscience in your writing. Give it up man! Abandon the quest before it is too late. Come back to the comfort of mankind's accumulated knowledge base. Flee from the Relativist who claims there is no Truth. Befriend the Empiricist who says apples always fall from the tree to the ground and intersecting straight lines form opposite and equal angles. Chaos and disappointment awaits you if you continue to pursue omniscience. Turn man, turn!

        • Dean Lesser

          • 0
          Jan 25 2012: Thank you for your concern! I will work on my pessimism and stay positive, much appreciated.
      • thumb

        natasha nikulina 50+

        • +1
        TED Translator
        Jan 26 2012: Hi, Dean!
        I don't see anything self contradicting here :) Your theory is elegant and well delivered ! A general proof called 'Goedel's theorem' shows that , ultimately, no self-consistent mathematical structure can ever be constructed which explains and encompasses the total richness of the world's truth. There will always be truth that lies beyond. You are right, science can describe the natural phenomenon, but can't answer the iconic question of a curious mind ' WHY' it is this way. " Only he who comprehends the whole can also comprehend a part " I think, this quote eloquently 'explains' why we can't understand everything. I don't remember who , I think, Einstein said, that it was a miracle that we understood at least something ! So you are in a good company in your quest for truth.:)
        "I wish we were able to know everything"
        Me too, but I think it is humanly impossible, at least through logic, through mind for it works on separation, dividing the whole into small parts we can observe, but assembling those parts we will never get the 'whole' again.It doesn't mean that the reality we found there is false, no, it is simply- less true. Besides , our mind works in Time and what we try to grasp is timeless and always changing, remaining still . We need to use our imagination, intuitive mind to see the bigger picture. I think that is quite possible, I mean, don't give up ! Whatever the result it's so interesting to go this way, it's fun :) and you are at far less danger here than someone who thinks that he 'knows' or abandon the hope to grasp "not less than everything !"
        I'll try to find you the article I've read recently in the net about the nature of 'knowing' and 'knowledge' . In two words : 'knowledge' is based on repetition, while "knowing' -is based on insight. I guess this idea is not alien to you too.:)

        • Dean Lesser

          • 0
          Jan 27 2012: Thank you Natasha, I'm glad we are on the same page about many things. I wanted to mention that point you made about Time but I kinda ran out of room in the description box, I agree 100% with you and I am very glad you took the time to share with me. I would like to read that article if you do find it, it sounds quite interesting. thanks again!
Showing all 11 comments