Imagination is more important than knowledge,
- Thread starter EmptyForceOfChi
- Start date
Name two people who would have an identical interpretation of what these differences are. You couldn't! Their interpretations would be based on the knowledge they appear to have acquired, and on their imagination if they are the 'creative' sorts.
Just because we can describe the differences between these two situations, does it mean that the differences we describe are truth? Can we rely on the interpretation, of what is the 'experiencing', as being the truth?
What I am saying is that the only truth we can be certain of is that we are constantly 'experiencing' - constantly 'knowing'. Any translation of that 'experiencing' is never the truth because we can all come up with different translations of that 'experiencing'.
The only value of thought - be it knowledge or imagination - is that it is another 'experiencing' - the experience of thoughts arising.
Thoughts have no substance or truth of their own, they can never be the truth. The only truth you can be certain of is that there is 'experiencing', 'knowing'. And by 'knowing' I do not mean 'knowing this or that' but just knowing of thoughts arising, of sensations appearing. That is undeniable. That is never changing and constantly there. Why not start with that as the truth because no one can deny that or disagree with that. It does not rely on knowledge or imagination to know that 'knowing' and 'experiencing' are always there.
Last edited:
How isn't it? If you were brought up knowing one thing and that's the only thing you knew, how can you accept anything else? Maybe you didn't understand what I meant because of the way I phrased it?
Can there ever be any balance of knowledge and imagination? What exactly does it mean to have balance of them both? Or what does it mean to get some sense of balance from having them both in balance, if this is what you might also be implying?
The mind is the active ingredient of both and the mind is never in balance. It is always swinging from one set of polarities to another. Look at your mind and see if it does not function in this way, no matter whether it is engaging in thoughts of knowledge or of imagination. Not a single thought can be had without engagement in polarity and division. Language presupposes separation. And, for this reason, it can never be in balance. There is always you there with your opinion and me here with mine. Things are either this way or that, good or bad, yesterday, tomorrow, on and on - right or wrong, balanced or unbalanced.
Where does your knowledge and imagination come from exactly? Where do these ideas appear from? Did you think them up? Did you learn them? Are they truly yours? Maybe that is what needs to be investigated. Then we would not bother to ask which is better, we might just enjoy it all no matter if it is knowledgeable or imaginative. No judgement. Not of there needing to be balance either. Then we can have fun with our argument because who's argument is it exactly, who is right or who wrong, who wiser and who more imaginative?
The mind is great, but if you seek to find any balance in any thought and you find it, you let me know, and i don't mean balance now and then, but true balance - because with mind, it can always be better or worse - that's how the mind works, always evaluating, and there can never be peace in comparison.
Last edited:
So according to Einstein a fantasy world is more important than the real world.
PipTweedle
Registered Senior Member
Maybe Einstein was familiar with Kant. Kant's proposal of Imagination, Understanding, and Reason as the three cognitive faculties was devised in order to help uncover how judgement is a living power which provides the ability to say "This is knowledge".
If you reconsider, then, Einstein's statement that "Imagination is more important than knowledge.", it seems quite possible that he was affirming the notion of imagination as an integral part/process in defining knowledge.
If you reconsider, then, Einstein's statement that "Imagination is more important than knowledge.", it seems quite possible that he was affirming the notion of imagination as an integral part/process in defining knowledge.
Last edited:
That's because languages have limitations. Language is only a medium and taught to us after our birth. Our brain doesn't function based on languages. So too much is lost in translation. Most times what 2 people feel can be the same. But it cannot be explained in any language. But humans have taken language for granted. They think that when they think they are thinking, they are actually thinking. They are not. The brain is utilizing very minimum of its potential when they think they are thinking.
You can solve that mystery if you learn to comprehend your feelings with a certain degree of precision without using your existing memory patterns. Like a brand new investigation into what you feel and why you feel. Study them, understand them and then begin to observe others, and compare and deduce. See where it takes you.
Also gotta remember that what your brain might consider as balance need not be balance for another brain.
Ophiolite
Valued Senior Member
I thought so.
I made this thread 4 years ago, how deep did you have to dig to retrieve this lol.
peace.
peace.
My largest problem in life is wondering why? not about god or any of that.
But why did "God" race time back to the Beginning of time. Why did he show up 2,000 years ago. He didn't have to go back. He could have stayed now, at the apex of technology.
Tell me, I know that one man died and ascended to heaven, heaven is moving backwards to the beginning. Did anyone ever think that this is the rapture?
Creation via time space compression vs god and his craft?
This would then mean we could find god in the universe, for a split second moving closer to earth until he was no longer moving faster than light.
So, Earth-------->Time Space Continuum/Crossover. After the cross over, he would appear to himself moving back to earth, but he would actually be moving forward but back in time. For one split second he himself is at two different places at the same time.
I still believe that this concept is the Holy Ghost.
My imagination at work.
But why did "God" race time back to the Beginning of time. Why did he show up 2,000 years ago. He didn't have to go back. He could have stayed now, at the apex of technology.
Tell me, I know that one man died and ascended to heaven, heaven is moving backwards to the beginning. Did anyone ever think that this is the rapture?
Creation via time space compression vs god and his craft?
This would then mean we could find god in the universe, for a split second moving closer to earth until he was no longer moving faster than light.
So, Earth-------->Time Space Continuum/Crossover. After the cross over, he would appear to himself moving back to earth, but he would actually be moving forward but back in time. For one split second he himself is at two different places at the same time.
I still believe that this concept is the Holy Ghost.
My imagination at work.
Knowledge and imagination liberate one and other.
Imagination more important than knowledge? Not so sure about more important, but I'd definitely say it leads to knowledge.
