Is this world too complex to understand?

For many years I have been reading books, magazines and newspapers. They are all trying to tell something or the other about this world of ours. But, till date we do not think that everything has been said and it is likely that we will never come to think so. There are many reasons responsible for this. I intend to deal with each of them in detail.

It is also noticed that there is a lot of confusion on many subjects. There are disagreements amongst the scholars on many theories which were supposed to be accepted as ultimate explanation of the phenomenon each is trying to explain. None of these theories take into account all variables known to exist in real world. Many of these were proved to be wrong after lapse of time. I intend to deal with the limitations of the concept of generalization and its utility.

I admire the person who has classified various branches of study into three groups namely Arts, Commerce and Science. Each of these groups consists of two subgroups namely Theoretical or Pure and Applied or Practical. It is a very good idea since the classification is done on the basis of distinct methods of study. However the distinctness of these methods eventually got fudged because of undue importance gained by scientific method of study over the other two. This has resulted in creating an undesirable bias in the human thinking. I intend to show how this bias has created hurdles in human pursuit of knowledge.

For a very long period of time human race was divided in three groups namely Rulers, Philosophers and Others. The rulers were the main proponents of change. They had willingness and power to bring about the changes. Largely they took their own counsel but sometimes they were influenced by philosophers. The rulers also dispensed justice on the same basis. Philosophers were thinkers who had courage to express their thoughts in public. They were loners and sometimes got followers from rich youngsters. The philosophers were disliked by rulers and were generally ignored by others. The third group namely ‘Others’ was credited with possession of Common Sense and who chose the most convenient way of living. In modern times the group of the rulers has almost become extinct. Democracy is the order of the day. Common man is the ruler responsible for bringing about changes. No courage is required to express one’s thoughts. This common man is sufficiently confused by the new groups that are emerging namely of consultants, experts, specialists, super specialists who know more or the most about less or the least. The common man is also dispensing justice by opinion polls. He is using his right of freedom to choose the most inconvenient way of living. The philosophers are now credited with the possession of common sense. This turnaround has resulted in dampening of the quest for knowledge. I intend to show how this has happened.

Lastly I intend to deal with limitations of the faculties provided to human beings with which he is trying to understand this world. I also intend to show how his assumption of his supremacy has hindered his progress on the path of knowledge. The undue importance given to scientific method of enquiry is other hurdle. The language he is using is yet another. I intend to discuss all these in detail and then try to answer the question “is this world too complex to understand?”

Chapter 1: Books, Periodicals and Newspapers.

All the written works have three types of limitations and strong points, first on account of the author, second on account of the language and third on account of the reader. The author is influenced by his experience, his understanding of the language and his intentions. The language is influenced by the words and the grammar. The reader is influenced by his experience, his understanding of the language and his intentions. Similarly the form of publication has its own merits and demerits. The purpose of publishing a newspaper is different than the purpose with which a book or a magazine is published. The psychology of an author contributing to a periodical is different than the psychology of the writer of a book. We have to keep in mind that this analysis is being done to find out why written works fall short of making the reader understand this world of ours.

Author

There are two types of authors. First type of author feels that, if he does not write, he will have to skip his dinner. This desperation comes from the fact or his self conviction that he can not do anything else for earning his living. The other type of author feels that if he does not write the rest of the world will remain in ignorance. This arrogance comes from the fact that he has the luxury of spare time which he has spent on reading or brooding and is left with some more time which he is spending on writing. The former will write what the masses want to read .Whatever the later writes will be his autobiography. Here what I mean by autobiography is his personal experiences and his personal views and variety of the same.The utility of his views will depend on books he has read and on concepts he has thought over. We find both types in all forms of publications.
Written words have a distinct advantage over spoken words. The reader gets more time to comprehend a book than he would get while listening to a scholar. He uses this time to find out exact meaning of words or to compare the views of the author with other scholars’ and with his own experiences. Speaking, of late, has become melodramatic. For the subjects, it is now listening with ears and eyes. Many a times, the cultural and temporal differences between speakers and listeners make the body language, at the best incomprehensible and at the worst misleading. (I have so far not been able to relate the moves and shakes or hiding and unhiding of various parts of body of the anchor to the subject matter that is being discussed on TV)Written words on the other hand are passive in this aspect. Many times reader has never seen the author. One can say that writing is scientific or pure form of communication whereas speaking is applied or practical form.
Words, spoken and written, have come to play an imperative role in communication and understanding so much so that it is very difficult to answer whether we can think without them. It is now almost forgotten that the languages are made by human beings much earlier than the script and grammar. For most of us it is beyond imagination to fathom how the human race existed and thought for millions of years before coming around to creation of words. (Similar thoughts can come to the minds of future generations with respect to ‘Information Technology’.)The dependence on words in our quest of knowledge makes it necessary to look into the strengths and weaknesses of this tool.