Notices
Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: A random thought

  1. #1 A random thought 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    29
    A random insight


    If creativity stands "roughly" for creation, the opposite should/could be "destructionism"/"destructivity"??

    I'll admit that ive never even thought about a opposite value of creation/creativity. Is this because i naturally only believe in creation?

    Also, lets say these values are true, and both do exist in some perspective. Then basically neither exists, or both are of equal value. Yet again, i find myself measuring absolution.

    Every creation destroys, every destruction creates.

    This tells me, that nothing starts, nothing ends. All that happens is a "re-arrangement" of molecules.

    PS: What does this make me, if i reason like this?


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    144
    Maybe it's not all creation and destruction, but rather reconstruction. things tend to evolve. A bad idea is lost eventually, while a good idea spreads and prospers. so if you look at it as a evolving progressive transformation from one set of ideas to a better set of ideas then it can be thought of as a living transformational process. I don't necessarily believe in an absolute duality of all things. Especially elastic things like concepts and ideas. As for what is makes you if you hold the dualist perspective on fundamental concept like creation and destruction, I think it may limit you in terms of understanding the fluid like process of change. I don't know this for sure but this is my idea at the moment. There may not be a black and white description of reality but a continual living process that is dynamic and not contained to black and white concepts such as pure good and pure evil. It may be a continuum of every changing processes both in the mind and the universe.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    144
    Maybe it's not all creation and destruction, but rather reconstruction. things tend to evolve. A bad idea is lost eventually, while a good idea spreads and prospers. so if you look at it as a evolving progressive transformation from one set of ideas to a better set of ideas then it can be thought of as a living transformational process. I don't necessarily believe in an absolute duality of all things. Especially elastic things like concepts and ideas. As for what is makes you if you hold the dualist perspective on fundamental concept like creation and destruction, I think it may limit you in terms of understanding the fluid like process of change. I don't know this for sure but this is my idea at the moment. There may not be a black and white description of reality but a continual living process that is dynamic and not contained to black and white concepts such as pure good and pure evil. It may be a continuum of every changing processes both in the mind and the universe.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    131
    Creation and destruction are subjective terms that we as humans place on states of matter and energy. A painting or a chair or music, etc. are just states of matter and energy acted upon by the same forces as everything else in the universe. Any subjective value we give them doesn't change what they are. As stated above, matter and energy change but are never absolutes.

    As for creativity and destruction being one or the other...actually not. The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle has proven that two states can exist at the same time. Taken to the nth degree it means your chair can be whole or broken at the same time. There is a randomness to particles popping in and out of existence that disallows for symmetry.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    144
    Extremely reductionist, I think. Yes everything obeys the uncertainty principal but in terms of human existence there are indeed macroscopic behaviors that are indicative of human existence. We purportedly have free will. but in terms of quantum mechanical states, if one subscribes to the many worlds theory, do not really have free will but instead carry out all possible actions simultaneously. When I choose to go right rather than left, the counterpart me goes left rather than right. But is it me that determines the fate of the other, or is the other that determines my fate. If you look at all of the histories and futures of a thing it all plays out in dechohered time lines at the same time. So do we have free will or is it simply a quantum mechanical process that causes an object, human, to undergo change in the temporal dimension
    But destruction is not only subjective but is a result of the second law of thermodynamics. every thing will eventually decay. I think that indeed the hum condition has it's own laws that if cannot be reduced into quantum, mechanical processes but are indeed, because we live in the macroscopic world, influenced by macroscopic laws. We don't have a union between QM and Relativity. So until then macroscopic processes must be described but GR.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6 Re: A random thought 
    Forum Professor sunshinewarrior's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    London
    Posts
    1,525
    Quote Originally Posted by Ravendell
    A random insight


    If creativity stands "roughly" for creation, the opposite should/could be "destructionism"/"destructivity"??

    I'll admit that ive never even thought about a opposite value of creation/creativity. Is this because i naturally only believe in creation?

    Also, lets say these values are true, and both do exist in some perspective. Then basically neither exists, or both are of equal value. Yet again, i find myself measuring absolution.

    Every creation destroys, every destruction creates.

    This tells me, that nothing starts, nothing ends. All that happens is a "re-arrangement" of molecules.

    PS: What does this make me, if i reason like this?
    In, I think, The Spy Who came in from The Cold, John Le Carre makes the point that the opposite of love is not hate, but indifference. May I suggest, in this context, that the opposite of creativity is nihilism rather than destructivity?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    29
    Interesting opinions, yet i feel that my ability to explain is still to weak. And my explanation is not received as i hoped it would be.

    And yes, to look at it this way is rather plain. Yet starting reasoning from both extreme ends, doesn't exclude anything between it, as for the "dynamic" values that is.

    The problem with this is that, while making opposites you'll go by, what seems to be, morality. Personally i do not believe in morals, i find them limiting ones potential. I think its rather a healthy additional perspective to aid the view on the matter.

    Therefore, the sounding opposites are rather identical then equal. Its merely a way of looking at things i suppose.

    To simplify this even more in a moral perspective, it would be like saying. (once more, pardon me for measuring absolution);

    Equals do not exist, we're all one.

    It sounds like a absolutist speaking, but i must press that, to not view this as such. But rather as a paradox.

    PS: Sunshinewarrior, what you say sounds very logical. Therefore i must ask of you, what is there to become of a "creative nihilist". Such a way is almost to painful to accept.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •