Love of God From the standpoint of paradoxical logic the emphasis is not on thought, but on the act. This attitude had several other consequences. First of all, it led to the tolerance which we find in Indian and Chinese religious development. If the right thought is not the ultimate truth, and not the way to salvation, there is no reason to fight others, whose thinking has arrived at different formulations.
Secondly, the paradoxical standpoint led to the emphasis on transforming man , rather than to the development of dogma on the one hand, and science on the other. From the Indian, Chinese and mystical standpoints, the religious task of man is not to think right, but to act right, and/or to become one with the One in the act of concentrated meditation.
The opposite is true for the main stream of Western thought. Since one expected to find the ultimate truth in the right thought, major emphasis was on thought, although right action was held to be important too. In religious development this led to the formulation of dogmas, endless arguments about dogmatic formulations, and intolerance of the "non-believer" or heretic. It furthermore led to the emphasis on "believing in God" as the main aim of a religious attitude. This, of course, did not mean that there was not also the concept that one ought to live right. But nevertheless, the person who believed in God—even if he did not live God— felt himself to be superior to the one who lived God, but did not "believe" in him. (Art of Loving, Enrich Formm)
Secondly, the paradoxical standpoint led to the emphasis on transforming man , rather than to the development of dogma on the one hand, and science on the other. From the Indian, Chinese and mystical standpoints, the religious task of man is not to think right, but to act right, and/or to become one with the One in the act of concentrated meditation.
The opposite is true for the main stream of Western thought. Since one expected to find the ultimate truth in the right thought, major emphasis was on thought, although right action was held to be important too. In religious development this led to the formulation of dogmas, endless arguments about dogmatic formulations, and intolerance of the "non-believer" or heretic. It furthermore led to the emphasis on "believing in God" as the main aim of a religious attitude. This, of course, did not mean that there was not also the concept that one ought to live right. But nevertheless, the person who believed in God—even if he did not live God— felt himself to be superior to the one who lived God, but did not "believe" in him. (Art of Loving, Enrich Formm)
量子力学揭示的另一个事实，就有点颠覆我们的认知了。在量子力学描述的世界中，世间的万事万物，本质并不是实实在在的物体，而是过程。
这个话听起来太反常识了。好在罗韦利给我们举了个例子，帮助我们更好地理解这个概念。
你可以想象一下大海，还有海面上的波浪，它们虽然形态看起来很不相同，但是其实它们都是水，从成分上看，没有什么不同。只不过当这些水被卷入一场运动的时候，它就变成了海浪，而当这场运动结束，它就又变成了海面上的水。
同样，大海、湖泊、小溪、瀑布，它们有成分上的不同吗？并没有。只是因为参与了不同的运动过程，就成了不同的形态。
从量子力学的角度再观察事物，我们也会有不一样的看法。比如你和我，我们并不是一个实体，因为每时每刻，都有无数的粒子离开我们的身体，也有无数的粒子加入进来。我们在这个世界上，也像那片海浪一样，是个流动的事件，是一个暂时保持的过程。
所以，量子力学教会我们，不要从物体的角度来思考世界，而应该从过程的角度来思考世界。
过程就是从一次相互作用到另一次相互作用的历程。世间的万事万物，是由不可分割的微小粒子构成的。但是物体的属性，只有在这些粒子发生相互作用的瞬间，才能让我们分别出来。一块石头是在一定时间内保持其结构的量子振动，就像海浪再次融入大海前会暂时维持它的形态一样。
罗韦利引用了一位哲学家写下的诗句，总结了他心中物质的本质：「物体是一个不变的过程」。
《現實不似你聽見》每日聽本書節錄
这个话听起来太反常识了。好在罗韦利给我们举了个例子，帮助我们更好地理解这个概念。
你可以想象一下大海，还有海面上的波浪，它们虽然形态看起来很不相同，但是其实它们都是水，从成分上看，没有什么不同。只不过当这些水被卷入一场运动的时候，它就变成了海浪，而当这场运动结束，它就又变成了海面上的水。
同样，大海、湖泊、小溪、瀑布，它们有成分上的不同吗？并没有。只是因为参与了不同的运动过程，就成了不同的形态。
从量子力学的角度再观察事物，我们也会有不一样的看法。比如你和我，我们并不是一个实体，因为每时每刻，都有无数的粒子离开我们的身体，也有无数的粒子加入进来。我们在这个世界上，也像那片海浪一样，是个流动的事件，是一个暂时保持的过程。
所以，量子力学教会我们，不要从物体的角度来思考世界，而应该从过程的角度来思考世界。
过程就是从一次相互作用到另一次相互作用的历程。世间的万事万物，是由不可分割的微小粒子构成的。但是物体的属性，只有在这些粒子发生相互作用的瞬间，才能让我们分别出来。一块石头是在一定时间内保持其结构的量子振动，就像海浪再次融入大海前会暂时维持它的形态一样。
罗韦利引用了一位哲学家写下的诗句，总结了他心中物质的本质：「物体是一个不变的过程」。
《現實不似你聽見》每日聽本書節錄
👍1