The world is a very complex place, that humanity has tried to improve their understanding upon for thousands of years. To understand the world, certain people or certain "minds" look at the world in differing ways. If one thinks abstractly, then they will find that there are hundreds and hundreds of ways to look at the world. However, even while thinking in an abstract way, these methods of understanding the world end up being classified into two possible categories: romantic understanding and classical understanding. Romantic understanding looks at the world based off of its immediate appearance. The romantic form views the world with emotion, and does not look at things beneath the surface. Classical understanding, on the other hand, looks at the world in terms of underlying form, or what is under the surface. The classical form of understanding also views the world in greater depth than the romantic form of understanding.
Personally, I would classify myself as both a romanticist and a classicist in terms of how I view the world. However, personally I would view myself as more of a romanticist, mainly because I let my emotions get in the way of how I judge the world. To be more specific, even though I look at the world and try to comprehend it through logic and reasoning, my own experience, will often lead to unconscious (unintentional) emotional feelings that get in the way of how I understand an idea. For example, if I did not know what a certain object was, and then I saw it for the first time, I would try understand it based off of prior knowledge in related areas, and recalling my prior knowledge would likely stir up some emotional memories. Also, I tend to unfortunately rush through assignments and tasks which I do not particularly enjoy or find boring, and thus think about these tasks more in terms of immediate appearance, rather than what is underneath the surface.
On the other hand, I believe that I also exhibit various qualities similar to those of classically-minded individuals. In the last paragraph, I mentioned that I typically rushed through things that I found boring or not enjoyable. However, if I was interested in learning about a certain subject or object, I would end up exploring this idea in greater depth. Therefore, I would dig underneath the surface. For example, if I am learning a new principle in physics class, such as the Earth's gravity is the same, or practically the same, no matter where you are on the planet, I would try to find out why gravity is the same no matter where you are. Thus, I would end up looking beneath the surface, and look at this principle more in underlying form, than what immediately comes to mind. Also, I firmly believe that it is hard to believe something is actually true, unless there is enough evidence to prove that it is, which follows the scientific method, a method that is commonly used by classically-minded individuals.
Robert M. Pirsig, the author and narrator of the novel, Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance, discusses various topics relating to the concepts of romantic and classical understanding. The narrator explains how he is more of a classically-minded person, and gives reasons why he is more classically-minded than romantically-minded. However, the narrator makes an opinion about the matter that many consider controversial. He believes that although both are valid ways of looking at the world, they are irreconcilable (conflicting) of one another. In my personal opinion, I do agree with this statement. If you view the world based off of immediate appearance, that is perfectly acceptable. If you view the world based off of underlying form, that is also perfectly acceptable. But if you try to understand (view) the world in both of these ways, and consistently intermingle the two ways with each other, then there is a conflict since you will think you are very familiar with an idea in a romantic way, but when you think about it classically, you will find out that you really are very unfamiliar with the subject matter. This pattern will keep repeating with many topics throughout this individual's life. Thus, it can be problematic. This is why I agree with Robert M. Pirsig's stance on the issue.
No comments:
Post a Comment