Contradictions are beautiful; as a matter of fact, I prefer them to conclusions. Conclusions tend to restrict and choke the freedom of individuals to think for themselves. Contradictions on the other hand allow the mind and spirit to roam freely and question everything.
I understand, though, that this holds true only for those who love to think for themselves, and who have developed their minds to do so. For the rest, I can imagine that contradictions would breed confusion. They would rather have conclusions, that is, thoughts that have been processed in the minds of others, and then served to them , either for a fee, or for free.
According to the New York Time’s A Scientist Takes on Gravity, Erik Verlinde, 48, a respected string theorist and professor of physics at the University of Amsterdam, has challenged the basic laws of Newtonian and Einsteinian Gravity. He categorically stated that ‘For me gravity doesn’t exist.’
It was quite thrilling for me to read that.
I truly admire the kind of mindset that is neither intimidated by the age of any conclusion, nor by the authority and expertise of those that made the conclusion.
I prefer to keep an open mind on all subjects and to keep learning.
Knowledge is infinite and extremely dynamic; there’s no end to it. So why conclude?
Heaven would be so boring were it not for the fact that we’ll be exploring the inexhaustible depths of God’s infinite knowledge and wisdom through all eternity.
I used to be upset and annoyed by dogmatic conclusions. Now I find it all rather amusing, silly, and boring.
I know what I know. I don’t know what I don’t know. But I know that what I don’t know is greater and superior to what I know. Furthermore, the progressive knowledge of what I don’t know will ultimately modify, or overwrite what I know.
In that case, I avoid any emotional attachments to any thing that I know, in spite of how sensible, reasonable, or logical it may appear.
knowledge is essentially dynamic.