March 30th, 2014
Paradox (from other - Greek παράδοξος - unexpected, strange from other - Greek παρα-δοκέω - I seem) - a situation (statement, statement, judgment or conclusion) that can exist in reality, but has no logical explanation. A distinction must be made between paradox and aporia. Aporia, unlike paradox, is a fictional, logically correct, situation (statement, statement, judgment or conclusion) that cannot exist in reality.
The most famous philosophical paradoxes of antiquity are the aporias of Zeno, proving the impossibility of movement: for example, the argument "Achilles and the tortoise": theoretically, Achilles cannot catch up with the tortoise, which will always be ahead of him at least a little. Because, in order to catch up with her, he must first come to the point where she was when he started moving, then to the point where the turtle had already reached during this time, and so on ad infinitum.
Let's stretch our brains and think about such real and "far-fetched", and often just far-fetched paradoxes and aporias.
1. The Banach-Tarski Paradox
Imagine that you are holding a ball in your hands. Now imagine that you started tearing this ball into pieces, and the pieces can be of any shape you like. Then put the pieces together so that you get two balls instead of one. What will be the size of these balls compared to the original ball?
According to set theory, the resulting two balls will be the same size and shape as the original ball. In addition, if we take into account that the balls have different volumes, then any of the balls can be transformed in accordance with the other. This allows us to conclude that the pea can be divided into balls the size of the Sun.
The trick of the paradox is that you can break the balls into pieces of any shape. In practice, this is impossible to do - the structure of the material and, ultimately, the size of the atoms impose some restrictions.
In order to be really possible to break the ball the way you like, it must contain an infinite number of zero-dimensional points available. Then a ball of such points will be infinitely dense, and when you break it, the shapes of the pieces can turn out to be so complex that they will not have a certain volume. And you can collect these pieces, each containing an infinite number of dots, into a new ball of any size. The new ball will still consist of infinite points, and both balls will be equally infinitely dense.
If you try to put the idea into practice, then nothing will work. But everything turns out great when working with mathematical spheres - infinitely divisible numerical sets in three-dimensional space. The solved paradox is called the Banach-Tarski theorem and plays a huge role in mathematical set theory.
There are a dozen more similar paradoxes under the cut ...
2. Peto's paradox
Obviously, whales are much larger than us, which means they have a lot more cells in their bodies. And every cell in the body can theoretically become cancerous. Therefore, whales are much more likely to get cancer than humans, right?
Not this way. The Peto paradox, named after Oxford professor Richard Peto, states that there is no correlation between animal size and cancer. Humans and whales are about the same chance of getting cancer, but some breeds of tiny mice are much more likely.
Some biologists believe that the lack of correlation in Peto's paradox can be explained by the fact that larger animals are better at resisting tumors: the mechanism works in such a way as to prevent cells from mutating during division.
3. The problem of the present
In order for something to physically exist, it must be present in our world for some time. There cannot be an object without length, width and height, and also there cannot be an object without "duration" - an "instantaneous" object, that is, one that does not exist for at least some amount of time, does not exist at all.
According to universal nihilism, the past and future take no time in the present. Also, it is impossible to quantify the duration that we call "present time": any amount of time that you call "present time" can be divided into parts - past, present and future.
If the present lasts, say, a second, then this second can be divided into three parts: the first part will be the past, the second - the present, the third - the future. A third of a second, which we now call the present, can also be divided into three parts. Surely you have already understood the idea - this can be continued indefinitely.
Thus, the present does not really exist because it does not continue in time. Universal nihilism uses this argument to prove that nothing exists at all.
4. Moravec's paradox
When solving problems that require thoughtful reasoning, people have difficulty. On the other hand, basic motor and sensory functions like walking do not cause any difficulty at all.
But when it comes to computers, the opposite is true: it is very easy for computers to solve complex logical problems like developing a chess strategy, but it is much more difficult to program a computer so that it can walk or reproduce human speech. This distinction between natural and artificial intelligence is known as the Moravec paradox.
Hans Moravec, a research fellow in the Robotics Department at Carnegie Mellon University, explains this observation through the idea of reverse engineering our own brains. Reverse engineering is most difficult to do with tasks that people perform unconsciously, such as motor functions.
Since abstract thinking became part of human behavior less than 100,000 years ago, our ability to solve abstract problems is conscious. Thus, it is much easier for us to create a technology that emulates this behavior. On the other hand, we do not comprehend actions such as walking or talking, so it is more difficult for us to make artificial intelligence do the same.
5. Benford's Law
What is the chance that the random number starts with the number "1"? Or from the number "3"? Or with "7"? If you are a little familiar with probability theory, you can assume that the probability is one in nine, or about 11%.
If you look at the actual numbers, you will notice that "9" occurs much less frequently than 11% of the time. There are also far fewer numbers than expected that start with "8", but a whopping 30% of numbers start with the number "1". This paradoxical picture shows up in all sorts of real world cases, from population to stock prices to river lengths.
Physicist Frank Benford first noted this phenomenon in 1938. He found that the frequency of a digit appearing as the first drops as the digit increases from one to nine. That is, "1" appears as the first digit about 30.1% of the time, "2" appears about 17.6% of the time, "3" about 12.5% of the time, and so on until the "9" appears in as the first digit in only 4.6% of cases.
To understand this, imagine that you are numbering lottery tickets in sequence. When you have numbered the tickets from one to nine, there is an 11.1% chance of any number being number one. When you add ticket #10, the chance of the random number starting with "1" increases to 18.2%. You add tickets #11 to #19, and the chance that the ticket number starts with "1" keeps going up, topping out at 58%. Now you add ticket number 20 and keep numbering the tickets. The chance of a number starting with "2" is growing, while the chance of it starting with "1" is slowly decreasing.
Benford's law does not apply to all distributions of numbers. For example, sets of numbers whose range is limited (human height or weight) are not subject to the law. It also doesn't work with sets that only have one or two orders.
However, the law applies to many types of data. As a result, authorities can use the law to detect fraud: when information provided does not follow Benford's law, authorities may conclude that someone has fabricated the data.
6. C-paradox
Single-celled amoebas have genomes 100 times larger than humans, in fact, they have some of the largest known genomes. And in species that are very similar to each other, the genome can drastically differ. This oddity is known as the C-paradox.
An interesting conclusion from the C-paradox is that the genome can be larger than necessary. If all the genomes in human DNA are used, then the number of mutations per generation will be incredibly high.
The genomes of many complex animals like humans and primates include DNA that codes for nothing. This huge amount of unused DNA, which varies greatly from creature to creature, seems to be independent of anything, which creates the C-paradox.
7. Immortal ant on a rope
Imagine an ant crawling along a rubber rope one meter long at a speed of one centimeter per second. Also imagine that the rope is stretched one kilometer every second. Will the ant ever reach the end?
It seems logical that a normal ant is not capable of this, because the speed of its movement is much lower than the speed at which the rope is stretched. However, eventually the ant will make it to the opposite end.
When the ant hasn't even started moving yet, it has 100% of the rope in front of it. A second later, the rope became much larger, but the ant also traveled some distance, and if you count it as a percentage, then the distance that it must travel has decreased - it is already less than 100%, albeit not by much.
Although the rope is constantly stretched, the small distance traveled by the ant also becomes longer. And, although in general the rope lengthens at a constant speed, the ant's path becomes slightly shorter every second. The ant also continues to move forward at a constant speed all the time. Thus, with every second, the distance that he has already traveled increases, and the one that he must travel decreases. As a percentage, of course.
There is one condition for the problem to have a solution: the ant must be immortal. So, the ant will reach the end in 2.8×1043.429 seconds, which is somewhat longer than the universe exists.
12. Paradox of the Wheel
For the first time, the paradox of the wheel was discussed even before Aristotle, but he was the first to come to grips with its study. Then Galileo Galilei fought over the solution of this problem. Although this may seem obvious to many. But let's get it right...
The Aristotelian wheel - this is the name usually given to the apparent paradox that appears when the wheel moves about the axis, when the wheel itself rolls on a plane in a straight line. It is believed that Aristotle first noticed this strange paradox, which for this reason retained the name "Aristotelian wheel".
Let us suppose that the circle, revolving around its center, rolls at the same time in a straight line and, with the completion of a complete revolution, describes a straight line, whose length is equal to the circumference of the circle. If in this circle, which we will call main, imagine another, smaller one, one-centered with the first and moving along with it, then after the large circle completes a complete revolution, the small circle will describe a straight line that is no longer equal to its circle, but to the circle of the main circle. An example of such a seeming paradox can be seen in the movement of a carriage wheel, the hub of which, in its revolution, will pass a straight line greater than its circumference and equal to the circumference of the wheel itself. The above example, as is well known, is confirmed by daily experience.
But here the question arises, how to explain that the circumference of the hub describes a straight line greater than this very straightened circle?
13. Russell's paradox
Here is one of the popular formulations: In one country, a decree was issued: "The mayors of all cities should not live in their city, but in a special city of mayors." Where should the Mayor of the City of Mayors live?
There are many popular formulations of this paradox. One of them is traditionally called the barber's paradox and goes like this: One village barber was ordered to "shave anyone who does not shave himself, and not shave anyone who shaves himself", what should he do with himself? "
Or: A certain library decided to compile a bibliographic catalog that would include all those and only those bibliographic catalogs that do not contain references to themselves. Should such a directory include a link to itself?.
Russell himself formulated it this way: “Let K be the set of all sets that do not contain themselves as their element. Does K contain itself as an element? If so, then, by definition of K, it must not be an element of K - a contradiction. If not, then, by definition of K, it must be an element of K - again a contradiction.
14. Levinthal's Paradox
The mystery of the phenomenon of spontaneous self-organization of proteins (and RNA) is summed up by the “Levintal paradox”. The riddle is this. A protein chain has an abyss of possible conformations (each amino acid residue has about 10 possible conformations, that is, a chain of 100 residues - about 10 to the power of 100 possible conformations). So the protein must look for "its" spatial structure among the order of 10 to the power of 100 possible. In this case, the protein can "feel" the stability of the conformation only when it gets right into it, since a deviation of even 1 Å can greatly increase the energy of the chain in a dense protein globule. And since the transition from one conformation to another takes ~ 10-13 seconds at least, enumeration of all 10 to the power of 100 structures would have to take about 10 to the power of 80 years, against which the lifetime of our Universe is 10 to the power of 10 years - the value is infinitely small… The question is: how could a protein “find” its structure in minutes.
However, this paradox already has a solution:
A protein can fold not “all of a sudden”, but by growing a compact globule due to the successive adherence of more and more links of the protein chain to it. In this case, the final interactions are restored one by one (their energy will fall approximately in proportion to the number of chain links), and the entropy will also fall in proportion to the number of fixed chain links. The drop in energy and the drop in entropy completely compensate each other in the main (linear in N) term in the free energy = - . This eliminates the term proportional to 10 N from the wrapping time estimate, and the wrapping time depends on much lower order of magnitude non-linear terms associated with surface enthalpy and entropy effects proportional to N 2/3 . For a protein of 100 residues, this is 10 100 2/3 ~ 10 21.5, which gives an estimate of the folding rate that is in good agreement with the experimental data given in c.
And it was simply established that the protein does not fold after its construction, but as it grows.
Generally quite similar.
I can remind you of something else interesting: for example, there is still a version of what or is it really. Let's remember about
Pushkin volume [collection] Andrey Bitov
Paradoxes friend (Autumn of Pushkin)
Paradox friend
(Autumn of Pushkin)
Oh how many wonderful discoveries we have
Prepare enlightenment spirit
And Experience, [son of] difficult mistakes,
And Genius, [paradoxes] friend,
[And Chance, god the inventor].
Pushkin, 1829
Written and not completed in the autumn of 1829. How easily, however, Pushkin neglected his friend dropping it halfway… a paradox in itself.
Paradoxes - this is such a surname, but he had a friend ... No wonder: we had a student at school named Phenomenov.
Paradoxical to everyone in everything understandable our Pushkin for the first time reached the Soviet schoolchild in his inexplicable love for autumn. What good is it when the holidays are over and it's back to school! Again around the chain.
Oh, red summer! I would love you
If it weren’t for the heat, yes dust, yes mosquitoes, yes flies ...
What flies are there! When cool flour. Yet again:
Winter! Peasant triumphant
Goes holding on to the tip...
And why is this a peasant so much triumphant?
And - no need to plow. Can trade fruits of summer labor.
We have forgotten the closeness of lordly and peasant life.
Pushkin starts plow autumn, harvesting your experience difficult mistakes. One cannot do it. But then he comes to the rescue friend.
Here we are sitting in the Central House of Writers with Vladimir Sokolov over a glass.
- I can't sleep at all! - either with bitterness, or with pride, he utters a great phrase.
Word for word, and - Pushkin!
“Here,” he says, already calmly, but angrily. - Everyone says "harmonious" ... What is there! Always a contradiction.
October has already come - the grove is already shaking off
The last leaves from their naked branches ...
What kind of leaves are there if the branches are naked!
I remembered Volodya and felt sad: how many of us have already flown around ... What am I holding on to?
It turns out that in vain I then removed the quatrain from the poem dedicated to his death:
A poem called "Story"
Everything tormented him, but he did not write.
There is no plot other than death
Especially when old age is in store.
Indian summer again. Sad time, eyes charm…
"I love the magnificent nature of wilting." Petersburg is not Moscow, but Mikhailovskoye is not Boldino either. The truth is also in where autumn is worse.
Two poor trees, and one of them is one
Rainy autumn completely surrounded,
And the leaves on the other, getting wet and turning yellow,
To clog the puddle, just waiting for Boreas.
But only. There is no live dog in the yard.
"Boredom, cold and granite" - only in St. Petersburg autumn is even worse. And this was another, final condition for writing The Bronze Horseman.
From the book Alla and Christmas author Skorokhodov Gleb AnatolievichAlexander Levshin: Pugacheva is a man of paradoxes I love this woman, this actress, this singer, otherwise I could not exist next to her with my quarrelsome character. For the twenty-second year I have been the guitarist of Pugacheva, trying to help her in any way I can. And I try to do it
From the book of Gamayun. Life of Alexander Blok. author Orlov Vladimir NikolaevichIN THE NAME OF PUSHKIN The eighty-fourth anniversary of the death of Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin has approached. The date was, as they say, not “round” at all. Nevertheless, the Petrograd House of Writers, a rather colorless and inactive institution, decided to initiate
From the book Famous Writers of the West. 55 portraits author Bezelyansky Yuri NikolaevichThe unsurpassed master of flirting and paradoxes Who is Bernard Shaw? This is a great Irishman (like Swift, Wilde and Joyce). famous English writer. Amazing playwright. Satirist and paradoxist. The real "Devil's Disciple" (that's the title of one of his plays) and
From the book of memories author Tsvetaeva Anastasia IvanovnaCHAPTER 15. SUMMER 1902. MARUSINA NAMEDAYS. PARENTS' TRIP TO THE URAL BREAKING OF MARBLE. CHELKASH AND GROMILO. PUSKY AND PUSHKIN'S POEMS. FAIR. LAST AUTUMN IN RUSSIA Again, the kind house of the Dobrotvorskys meets us, on the way to the dacha, with hospitable gaiety. Everyone has grown up a little.
From the book In the footsteps of Adam the author Heyerdahl TourA life woven from paradoxes Thor Heyerdahl is certainly, as it is fashionable to say now, an iconic figure of the bygone 20th century. In fact, we do not hesitate to put him on a par with F. Nansen, R. Amundsen, J.-I. Cousteau. Of course, one cannot put a sign between them.
From the book Self-Portrait, or Notes of the Hanged Man author Berezovsky Boris AbramovichRussia is a country of paradoxes Russia is a country of paradoxes. The more unloved the ruler in Russia, the more precisely he acts in the interests of the country. And vice versa, if they love the ruler, this means that this person is acting contrary to the interests of Russia. The point is that he is in
From the book of Lermontov: Mystical genius author Bondarenko Vladimir GrigorievichOn the death of Pushkin And yet, the fullness of Lermontov's genius was revealed, as often happens, seemingly suddenly. Many beautiful poems have already been written, so everything would go on. But an explosion was needed, a breakthrough from the depths of the subconscious of all forces that had not yet awakened. 1837
From the book Ugresh Lira. Release 2 author Egorova Elena NikolaevnaAt Pushkin's We'll have a bite to eat at the Bistro on Tverskaya And we'll sit on Pushkin's bench. I would talk to you day - day, Looking at the great poet. Majestic and thoughtful poet, He is beautiful for a loving look. And love him for thousands of years I agree. You don't need another. You are the other one, without
From the book "Magical Places Where I Live with My Soul..." [Pushkin Gardens and Parks] author Egorova Elena NikolaevnaRereading Pushkin We were born for inspiration, For sweet sounds and prayers. A. S. Pushkin Spring again. The soul is tired From the struggle with trifles In the stuffy cages of vanity, But it needs so little: Look at the world with eyes Alien to worldly vanity, Plunge into the gentle pool of Blooming
From the book Pushkin without gloss author Fokin Pavel Evgenievich"About Pushkin!" Nashchokin constantly repeats that a lot is written about Pushkin and invented about him. P. I. Bartenev Spiritualists assure: the most nervous and unfriendly spirit, which from the threshold begins to snarl and swear when he is called and received
From Oscar Wilde author Livergant Alexander YakovlevichTheater of masks, secrets and paradoxes, or "I love the theater, it is much more real than life!" "The Good Woman" (originally the comedy "Lady Windermere's Fan" was called - "A Play about the Good Woman") Margaret, Lady Windermere, gives the impression of a happy wife, caressed
From the book Tenderer than the sky. Collection of poems author Minaev Nikolai NikolaevichTowards autumn (“How sad the old park is towards autumn ...”) How sad the old park is towards autumn On the slope of August days: The lifeless sky is blue As if it has become greener. A calm pond is covered with mud, In the arbor - silence, the benches are empty, And in some places they are entangled in silky cobwebs.
From the book He lived between us ... Memories of Sakharov [collection ed. B.L. Altshuler and others] author Altshuler Boris LvovichPushkin (“Pushkina Natalia Nikolaevna! ...”) Pushkina Natalia Nikolaevna! How can I justify you, If you behaved ingloriously And made him suffer. Butterfly fluttering through the salons, Reveling in ballroom fuss, Secular etiquette and template, You were vain and empty. Rhythm
From the book Living Yesenin author AnthologyAM Yaglom A close friend, a distant friend Accidents play a big role in any life. In my circumstances, it turned out that I, apparently, knew A. D. Sakharov longer than all others (except, perhaps, some of his relatives), with whom he continued to meet until the end
From the book Favorites. Pushkin's wisdom author Gershenzon Mikhail Osipovich From the author's bookPushkin's Dreams (125) Pushkin early noticed the mysterious phenomenon of sleepy dreams, and over the years, as we shall see, at times thought intently about it. In his works, starting with "Ruslan and Lyudmila" 1817-1819, ending with "The Captain's Daughter" 1833, he depicted five dreams.
"And experience, the son of difficult mistakes" ...
And experience, the son of difficult mistakes,
And a genius, a friend of paradoxes ”A.S. Pushkin
* * *
Oh how many wonderful discoveries we have
Prepare enlightenment spirit
And experience, the son of difficult mistakes,
And genius, paradoxes friend,
And chance, god is the inventor.
A.S. Pushkin. Works in three volumes.
St. Petersburg: Golden Age, Diamant, 1997.
“And the Lord God said, Behold, Adam has become like one of Us, knowing good and evil; and now, no matter how he stretched out his hand, and took also from the tree of life, and ate, and began to live forever. And the Lord God sent him out of the Garden of Eden to till the ground from which he was taken. And he drove out Adam, and set up in the east near the garden of Eden the Cherubim and the flaming sword that turns to guard the way to the tree of life. Genesis chapter 3:22-24
//// "In this sense, the theological point of view seems to be universal, since it takes into account both the natural (human) and supernatural (Divine) components of the origin of the state."
// “Definitely, I agree: humanity should be considered as God-manhood.”
If it is possible so, then it is still more conditional and metaphorical. A person cannot be greater than God or the universe itself, he does not always cope with his garden or even his house, not to mention the country, pride or ambition. Even a small world dependent on a person does not completely submit to him. In order to even get closer to the Divine-human, a lot needs to be changed first in oneself, and before that, oh, how far away. To have time, even in a small fraction, to bring benefits to the environment and not die ingloriously. The world has become fragile as never before by the weakness of the strong and the strength of the weak!
//// The question is not even so much about what a person "having dignity" will agree with or not, and not even about who others consider him to be, but about who he is himself in reality.
// "But does anyone define "instead of" a person - who he REALLY is?"
“...However, according to this theory, the origin of the state lies in the synergy (participation) of the Divine will and the free will of man, his creative activity. In this sense, the theological point of view seems to be universal, since it takes into account both the natural (human) and supernatural (Divine) components of the origin of the state. See etymology "state." http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theological_theory_of_origin_of_state
This is exactly what “the theological point of view seems to be universal”, but perhaps not the only one, is especially important for us!
This is the whole point of the world's conceptual problem of meaning, when only one religion seems to be able to "logically" and to the end say what is the beginning and end of the earthly form of civilization. But this is precisely what corresponds to the meaning of a complete and contradictory system of proofs, which goes beyond the boundaries of logic, when it is only possible to say “the famous maxim Credo quia absurdum est (“I believe, because it is absurd”, that is, metaphysical in understanding)”. “And the Son of God died: this is indisputable, for it is absurd. And, buried, he rose again: this is certain, for it is impossible. Tertullian "On the Flesh of Christ" See: http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/
And what about the material and non-contradictory world of nature, which is the beginning and end of itself in the essence of its “materiality” and practical stability of an objective law, and not chance, but visible from the human side, as an indefinite syncretic essence of the ideal and material in practice?! Here even A.S. Pushkin "And the case, God is the inventor" i.e. – the case is subject to the necessity of Divine logic in the synthesis of free Creation and Revelation in Genius and the manifestation of Paradox.
Here we come to the brink of such an understanding as the paradox of the existence of something different in one, but outside the contradiction and at the same time in it, which is the dialectic or the path of Tao. Is this not proof of the paradox itself as a paradox of logical-illogical and illogical-logical, like two in one and more in subtraction, trinity, etc.? with a certain sign of a “bad” infinity of meaning in itself as a kind of “thing in itself” and beyond the limit of understanding and transcendence?! That's what we need to understand and grasp... in the higher creative power of the superphenomenon than what is available, what we already know and see!
But in the words you quoted earlier from the Bible, “And the serpent said to the woman: no, you will not die, but God knows that on the day you eat them, your eyes will be opened, and you will be like gods, knowing good and evil »; “And the eyes of both of them were opened, and they knew that they were naked, and they sewed together fig leaves, and made themselves aprons.” one*. And in the psalms of David: “I said: you are gods, and the sons of the Most High are all of you; but you will die like men and fall like any of the princes.” 2* (1* Genesis. Ch.3.; and 2* Psalter Ch. 81.)
- Is there a logical contradiction here in the denial of God himself from the moment of the appearance of nature and a free person in it, or are these allegorical and metaphorical images?! But there is also no unambiguity and completeness here for a clear understanding of the essence, but there is only an intuitive sign of the inexpressible Revelation, as a wonderful mirror reflection of the everyday meaning of our everyday life in the feeling of “as - I am who exists and is similar to God” and “by this I am already God” ... ! But is it so, and in what way is it so?
And here it is not always so important who said it, since in words a lot of “something” is transmitted only conditionally, by people speaking and writing texts or apocrypha and by them (narrating) heroes and images in retelling. All legends exist as indirect or direct evidence of the special fabric of the transmitted meaning, that for us there are already more “virtual” characters of events and meanings in hidden and living contexts. But that is also why the very meaning and logic of the transmitted phenomenon or event is so important here, and what is said exactly by this and allegorically, but also in another, the Logos of the bridge-meaning or its edge or facet.
So, here we have contradictions in logic and religion, which clearly indicate to us the incompleteness of definitions - the consistency of the incompleteness of logic, and on the other hand, the completeness of the contradictory nature of religion and nature, as a natural limitation of our understanding. Where is the “genius of paradox is a friend”, but even he is a child of time and a level of understanding that is under the phenomenon of something higher than meaning. But in the very image of a certain allegory, we are all often united and similar, although we perceive it differently and in our own different context. This is where the common channel of communication passes, in the understanding as a single one.
Yes, a person determines who he really is from the moment of his practical manifestation in relations with other people in the direct totality of all personal feelings and qualities of the soul. What also happens indirectly through other people's assessment of his qualities and mental self-assertion of opinion, where he receives an important symbolic sign, as a sign of more and better, and not a derogatory label of "animal", which can only awaken in negative and low, but not induce and inspire in confidence and appreciation of a positive perspective for others and oneself in equality of reverence, sympathy and love, but beyond any slavery and infringement in unlawful and humiliating coercion. Only in this way do we reach the creative and true motivation of the very moment of innovative development and its driving insight and intuition.
"God is love"!
Here, a pure and striking example for all of us is given by Jesus Christ (In Christianity, the Messiah, Savior, God the Son, the Son of Man. In Islam, revered as "one of the important prophets of God" and the Messiah). He was a consistent and firm messianic (expected) creator-embodiment of the new teaching, preaching the "golden rule of morality" of the New Testament as the second basic commandment (3*). But he was also a faithful warrior with a “spiritual sword” and the idea of embodying a special phenomenon of the role of the God-Man on Earth, where “God became man so that man could be deified” (St. Athanasius the Great).* But here, too, we should understand the metaphor correctly. - As the path of the wise Divine equality of all believers in the awareness of their moral measure, where He himself was not stingy to give even his own life for execution as a pledge of the future of each of us who loves, feels, honors and remembers him with good hope and faith. “Jesus said to him: love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind: this is the first and greatest commandment; the second is like it: love thy neighbor as thyself; on these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets” Note: (3*) (Matt. 22:38-40).
“According to the doctrine of most Christian churches, Jesus Christ combines in himself the divine and human nature, being not an intermediate being below God and above man, but is both God and man in his essence. Incarnated as a man, He healed human nature, damaged by sin, by His sufferings on the Cross, then resurrected it and raised it to the Kingdom of Heaven. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_Christ
See: Godel's Completeness and Incompleteness Theorem.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godel_Incompleteness_Theorem
Wasserman on God: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ecj-GFq3fYQ&feature=related
Tertullian: http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/
The Golden Rule of Morality:
http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_rule of morality
Note* Christianity: http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity
Jesus Christ: http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_Christ
http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theological_theory_of_origin_of_state
George Orwell. Notes on nationalism. 1945 http://orwell.ru/library/essays/nationalism/russian/r_nat2
Deauville Resolution and Russia - Strategic Culture Foundation | Strategic Culture Foundation
L.F. Kotov Or maybe the verse is not finished?
Oh, how many wonderful discoveries we have
Prepares enlightenment spirit
And experience, the son of difficult mistakes,
And genius, paradoxes friend,
And chance, god is the inventor...
Science in Pushkin's work
Inclusions of "scientific" themes in Pushkin's poetic works are quite frequent. But this five-verse can be called the quintessence of the theme "Science in Pushkin's work."
Only five lines, and what coverage - education, experience, genius, chance - all the components that determine the progress of mankind.
Pushkin's interest in contemporary science was very deep and versatile (as, indeed, in other aspects of human activity). Confirmation of this is his library, which contains works on the theory of probability, the works of Pushkin's contemporary, academician V.V. Petrov, a Russian experimental physicist in the study of electrical phenomena, and others (in Russian and foreign languages).
Pushkin's library in his apartment museum includes many books on natural science topics: the philosophical works of Plato, Kant, Fichte, the works of Pascal, Buffon, Cuvier on natural science, Leibniz's works on mathematical analysis, Herschel's works on astronomy, research on physics and mechanics of Arago and d'Alembert, Laplace's work on the theory of probability, etc.
Pushkin, being the editor and publisher of the Sovremennik magazine, regularly posted articles by scientists reflecting scientific and technical topics in it.
Pushkin could also learn about the achievements of physics of that time from communication with the famous scientist, inventor P.L. Schilling, the creator of the first electromagnetic telegraph apparatus, an electric mine. Pushkin knew him very well and Schilling's inventions could well be seen in action.
The Poet's interest in Lomonosov's work can be estimated from the fact that, having read the "M.V. Lomonosov's track record for 1751-1756" in the Moscow Telegraph magazine, he was struck by the versatility and depth of research. The poet expressed his admiration as follows: “Combining extraordinary willpower with extraordinary power of concept, Lomonosov embraced all branches of education. Historian, rhetorician, mechanic, chemist, mineralogist, artist and poet, he experienced everything and penetrated everything ... ". And later he adds: "He created the first university. It is better to say that he himself was our first university."
now look at what this poem could have been like if the Poet had tried to complete the line with the missing rhyme.
Oh, how many wonderful discoveries we have
Prepares enlightenment spirit
And experience, the son of difficult mistakes,
And genius, paradoxes friend,
And chance, god is the inventor...
And an idle dreamer.
This Pushkin quintuple was discovered after the death of the poet, while analyzing his workbooks. In the first four lines, the rhyme is adjacent, and the fifth line was left without a pair. It can be assumed that Pushkin did not finish this poem.
I read these lines and see how the poet hastily sketches out an impromptu, ripening in the subconscious, and suddenly poured out in finished form when reading a message about the next scientific discovery in a newspaper or magazine. I imagined - "hurriedly", but somehow this word does not fit with writing with a quill pen; it is more plausible that Pushkin wrote rather slowly, which contributed to the birth in his subconscious of these brilliant lines, which include all the "engines of progress" - enlightenment, experience, genius, chance - already in finished form. It seems to me that the first 4 lines were written impromptu, and the 5th, after rereading what was written, the poet added after some thought. Added and set aside for later reading and possible use in any of the future works. But ... it did not happen and the fragment remained unpublished during the life of the author.
Of course, these are only my personal ideas, not based on anything, but I write them under the heading "Marginal Notes".
And so I will continue. It seems to me that the poet postponed this fragment, because he felt a certain incompleteness of coverage in this poem of the phenomenon of the birth of new discoveries. Postponed to think about it later. But... it didn't happen.
And the genius of paradoxes is a friend.
Experience is a mass of knowledge about how NOT to act in situations that will never happen again.
In our life there are some looped situations when the same thing happens to us regularly, despite the fact that, it would seem, we abstracted from it in every way, and willfully said - "everything, never again!"
You know - it happens that you run from something, you run, and then you still come back to it. And you stand dumbfounded over the conflagration - "well, how is it ?!".
Sometimes you meet different people in your life, and after a while they all begin to behave the same way. And you think - you need to change a person. You change a person - and he again becomes the same. The situation is looping.
I don’t want to get into the jungle a lot (“don’t dig deep - the cable is buried there”), but this is all from the fact that we, by our action or inaction, constantly attract certain people into our lives. And after a while, consciously or unconsciously, we do so that they begin to turn to us with some of their specific side.
They also have other sides - but they are turned to us by this one.
If we don’t like it, then there is only one way to change something - to understand ourselves, to realize why and why I attract this into my life.
What am I broadcasting to the world that it mirrors exactly this to me? And the world is a big mirror. When we experience a range of toxic experiences, it's not the world that tripped us up, it's us looking in the mirror.
There is nothing to blame on the mirror, if the face is crooked.
When the situation is meaningful, behavior changes. Behavior changes, people change. Either they turn the other way, or some leave and others come.
When the situation is fully completed and meaningful, we know what to do with it. And then it turns into an experience. The same, the son of difficult mistakes.
Yes, any experience comes through mistakes. If you do not allow yourself to make mistakes, there will be no experience.
There will be a lot of smart quotes, rules, references to the thoughts of the life of the greats of this world, but there will be no own experience. And all these scatterings of wise thoughts will not help anyone.
You can, of course, give an Andamanese native a textbook of trigonometry, saying (not at all prevaricating) that this is a necessary, smart and useful thing - but it will be completely up to one place for an Andamanese native.
It's the same with experience.
What, what? "A smart man learns from the mistakes of others, a fool from his own?". There are mistakes that you only need to go through yourself. To remember the experience with the body. So that the body remembers and does not remind.
If this experience is not stitched in our body, no golden brain will help to transform someone else's mistake into our own experience.
When there is experience, the situation ceases to loop. When a similar situation comes and there is experience, it is already clear what can be done and what result to get in this.
And then you can act in different ways, there is a choice, there is no longer a need to run like a squirrel in one wheel, to follow your own tail.
In a sense, this is such a lyceum - passed the exam, closed the topic - you rise to a higher level.
Failed the exam - it will take a little time and there will be a retake. Life will definitely throw up exactly the same situation - with another person, in another place, in other, it would seem, conditions - but the situation will repeat itself again.
And it will continue if you constantly fail the exam, at least endlessly - in some way, unlike us, there is a lot of time.
Oh you sly old devil!
One pleases - whom God loves, that is what he tests. God gives assignments knowing exactly that I have the strength to complete it.
Sometimes I, like a negligent schoolboy, meet him in the corridor. He squints his gray eyes, winks at me - "what, failed the exam again?". I nod. "Well, take a break and come back for a retake," he grins.
Come on, damn it! Where am I going.
Favorites (suffered):
