Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Appreciating Imagination

Appreciating Imagination

Ratings: (0)|Views: 170|Likes:
Published by nqtu1798

More info:

Published by: nqtu1798 on Nov 29, 2010
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial


Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less





Appreciating Imagination
This is a very interesting title that I think will be a very engaging discussion. Headdresses many of the major issues and areas of human civilization, psychology, personaldevelopment, self-realization and so on. He is presumably giving a long talk about theimportance of our minds and of the domain of the imagination. He has commonlyreferred to it as the “Divine Imagination” and I think this is a fitting description becausethe realm of the imagination is very real and extremely profound. It is far more than justsome kind of faculty in our brains that allows us to visualize images in our minds. Theimagination seems to me like the place where you can make use of the brain in a way thatallows you to both create and explore, and I think you are crafting the products with amaterial that is made of dreams, made of magic, made of stardust or something.“The imagination is just as real of a place as across the river as if you had just acquiredeyes”This is a very definitive statement and I agree with it, this sums the basis of many of hisideas and is supported by them as well. In many ways I have come to understand the highvalue and importance of our imaginations, that they are truly a divine gift and blessingthat can be used for so much, including healing. I hope to develop the use and clarity of my imagination, and learn a lot about any kind of issue that he will address.11/13Begin.It’s a very interesting group of people. I can’t imagine a domain of human endeavor thatisn’t impacted by the human imagination. Teasing the imagination apart from the talkingmonkeys is not an easy thing to do. Imagining ourselves without imagination is itself a paradox.Yet, what is it?And why is it?If you take the view that biology does nothing in vain and evolutionary economics areincredibly spare then why have this faculty that allows one to command and manipulaterealities which do not exist?That’s, to my mind, the basic function of the imagination, some people might argue andsay ‘well the imagination is the coordination of the mundane data’ in other words ‘if Iwork this hard, and earn this much money, can I afford that car?’
To my mind this is not putting great pressure on the human imagination. The humanimagination as I suppose it is almost an extension of the visual faculty.Imagination is something that one beholds, something that you spoke of castles in the air,or something like that. One idea that is worth entertaining because it is entertaining, notnecessarily because it’s the truth, but is the idea that the imagination is actually a kind of window onto realities not present?In other words, it’s very clear from an evolutionary point of view that our body and our sensory preceptors are organized in such a way as to protect us. To warn of dangers, togive you the muscles to respond to that danger when it comes.The imagination doesn’t seem to work quite like that. If the imagination runs riot in thedimension of the mundane, it’s paranoia.In other words if you believe every cop on the corner is looking at you, every chanceheard comment is about you, the imagination is, in that situation pathological.It is taking the raw data of experience and giving it a maladaptive spin.SO then where is the imagination appropriate? It seems that it is most appropriate in thedomain of human creativity.In fact separating art from imagination is simply the exercise of separating cause fromeffect.Art, sculpture, poetry, painting, dance, is like the footprint of where the imagination has been.The abstract expressionists, Polack particularly always insisted that a paintaing, a Polack is not what process is about, the process is about making a Polack, being Polack, the actof creation.What the rest of us have been left with has been a husk, a tracing, something left behindwhich says “Imagination was here, imagination acted in this place, and this is what itleft”A very interesting thing that is going on in physics at the moment, and I don’t want tospend too much time on this because it is slightly off subject but it certainly isfascinating.The great bridge between art and science that was supposedly built in the 20
centuryhinged on this thing called the uncertainty principle.
It was the idea that the as you know more and more about things about certain aspects of a system, an atomic system in this case, certain other parts of it lose focus and becomeless and less clear.For example if you know velocity you don’t know position, as you hone in on exact position, velocity becomes smeared out.Probably more ink and more breath beating has been shed over this aspect of modern physics than any other. Now, for the great embarrassment of all the people who held workshops, and wrote books, and pontificated on this matter, it appears that this is what it always looked like:fuzzy and confused thinking.And that the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, or rather the Heisenberg formulation of the quantum theory is now not to be preferred. The preferred understanding now is theversion of quantum theory formulated by David Bohm.The difference between these 2 theories mathematically is precisely zero, there is nodifferent, but they make different assumptions.The reason originally that the Heisenberg formulation was preferred was because it wasfelt that this uncertainty principle, which was a hard swallow, was not a hard a swallowas the piece of baggage which the Bohm theory carried embedded in it. That piece of  baggage was called “non-locality”The 2 theories produced identical mathematical descriptions of nature. But one had thisuncertainty principle in it, the other had built into it “non-locality” Non-locality is the idea that any 2 particles that had been associated with each other inthe past retain across space and time a kind of connectivity such that if you change a physical aspect of one of these particles, the law of conservation of parity will cause theother particle to also undergo a change at the exact same moment even though they may by now be separated by millions of light years of space and time.This was thought to be so counter intuitive, so preposterous, that the Heisenberguncertainty principle was chosen as the lesser of two evils.But it turns out over the past 10 years, experiments have been done in the laboratory, notthought experiments but actual apparatus experiments, which would secure that non-locality actually is real. There is below the ordinary surface of space and time, ruled byrelativistic physics there is this strange domain of instantaneous connectivity of allmatter, of all phenomenon.

You're Reading a Free Preview

/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->