That's why I want to study it. To gain that intuitive understanding of it. But I get what you mean; you can only get to the very small by focusing on the very large. But the reverse is also true. You just have to figure out how to trick your brain into doing it.
There's a reason you despise pop-science. You see it as a way to make people feel as though they understand a concept without truly understanding it; that's why if you ask most stoner college dorm drifters to explain these lofty concepts to you they'll fizzle out and die before they can.
But being able to understand something and being able to explain it to others are two separate skills. To understand something is subconscious, to communicate it to others is conscious.
In the end, I understand that I'll only truly understand these concepts when I can explain them to people in narrative form. But I also understand that it's a waste of time to try and explain them directly.
Yes, feed the (you) farmer, he'll have a nice (you) harvest this year
Thank you, will read
The reason drugs are perceived in others as "temporary insanity" is because the drug only lowers your capacity to understand things. You can contemplate things in their smaller, simpler forms.
However, this does not help when one tries to apply these concepts to a larger scale. When one tries to get other people to understand.
But if i'm right, the reason the collective human consciousness has thrived for so long is we don't need these very small concepts explained to us. We already understand many of them subconsciously, and all we're doing by studying advanced sciences and mathematics is becoming consciously aware of subconscious processes. But we don't really need to.
This is again why the arts and narrative form attract me much more than the sciences and technical form. With art we've discovered a way to communicate these universal truths without needing to awaken everything in our conscious minds.
That's why reading scientific journals creates no emotional reaction, yet books and movies cause us to cry.
>and thanks for pointing out the (you) farmer
Pretty much this
Philosophy is the marriage of art and science. For a while, they were considered the same thing (back when philosophy was just asking questions about every little thing). Now that we've come so far in sciences and still haven't even scratched the surface of philosophy, only now do we separate the two.
he's right tho, see above
You're not wrong.
Like I've been saying, the drug only lowers one's capacity for understanding. Not communicating.
Thank you, sounds interesting
>Like I've been saying, the drug only lowers one's capacity for understanding. Not communicating.