secrets [Theme] Page 4

Today, in answers to the question "Why does something exist and not Nothing?" thinkers were divided into three camps. The "optimists" argue that there must be a reason why the world exists, and that we are quite capable of discovering it. "Pessimists" believe that there must be a reason why the world exists, but we can never know for sure - perhaps because the part of the world available to us is too small to find a reason, or because the reason lies outside of what is available to the human mind, which nature has created for survival, and not for penetration into the inner structure of the cosmos. And, finally, the "deniers" insist that there is no reason for the existence of the world, and therefore the question itself does not make sense. Let's assume you are an optimist. What is the most promising approach to the mystery of being? Traditional, who considers a god-like essence to be a necessary source of the emergence and existence of all things? Or a scientist who uses the ideas of quantum cosmology to explain how the universe made its leap, emerging from the void? A purely philosophical approach that tries to deduce the reason for the existence of the world from abstract reasoning about values or from the absolute impossibility of non-being? Some kind of mystical approach that seeks to get an answer through insight? Nowadays, all these approaches have their supporters and, at first glance, seem to merit attention. Indeed, only by examining the mystery of being from all possible sides, we can hope to find some kind of answer.

Nothing is not only the simplest, least unpredictable, and most symmetric of all possible realities, but also has the best entropy profile: its maximum entropy is equal to its minimum entropy, which is zero.

Of all the possible answers to the mystery of existence, perhaps the most exciting would be the discovery that, in spite of everything, the world is the cause of itself. This version was first proposed by Spinoza, who boldly (albeit somewhat indistinctly) argued that everything that exists consists of a single infinite substance and all separate entities, both physical and mental, are only temporary changes of this substance - like waves on the surface of the ocean. Spinoza called this infinite substance "Deus sive Natura" ("God or Nature"). According to Spinoza, God and nature cannot be separate from each other, because then they mutually restrict each other. Therefore, the world itself is divine: eternal, infinite and is the cause of itself, and therefore, deserves from us respectful and reverent treatment. Such a metaphysical understanding of the world, according to Spinoza, leads to "intellectual love" for it - the highest goal for man and the maximum approach to immortality.

Where did our universe come from? Does not the very fact of its existence indicate the actions of some higher creative force? When a believer asks an atheist this question, he usually gets one of two answers. In the first case, an atheist can say that if we admit the existence of such a "creative force," then we will have to admit the existence of another such force in order to explain the presence of the first, then the third, the fourth - and so on, ad infinitum. In the second case, the atheist will answer that even if some "creative force" exists, it is not at all godlike. Why should the First Cause be a wise and kind being, and besides, interested in all the details of our thoughts and our sex life? The root cause does not have to be reasonable.

Compared with the eternal cosmos in the view of the ancients, our own universe is rather new: it is about 14 billion years old. And its future may also have a limit. According to modern cosmological concepts, after a long existence, it is destined either to suddenly disappear as a result of the Great Compression, or gradually turn into a dark and cold Nothingness. The temporary finiteness of our world (today it is, yesterday it was not yet, and tomorrow it will not be) makes its existence unreliable and dependent on circumstances - as well as mysterious. It seems that a world that stands on a solid ontological foundation should not behave in this way, but should be eternal and imperishable. Such a world, unlike the finite universe of the Big Bang, would look self-sufficient and could even contain the reason for its own existence.

“And my secrets make my hair softer and shinier,” Severin said, smoothing his curls with his hand.

You can learn gestures on your own if you stop speaking out loud during the rehearsal of your performance. Shut up and show what you say, and say the text to yourself. Several times do this exercise near the mirror, and you will forever learn the secrets of gestures.

Don't put your hands in your pockets. It is clear that hands are always a problem and there is nowhere to put them. You can only reach into your pocket for a second to get what is there.

A non-closing mouth may be useless... But having a lot of secrets isn't that good either.

How much unsaid remains between people, even if they love each other, and how scary that others will tell about it and their love will go to dust.

There has to be a mystery in you. The best option is a sudden appearance and don't forget to leave just as suddenly after the performance.

It is forbidden to be in the place where you are going to perform. The place to perform should be secretive and exuberant. It is a pity that I found out about this too late, I often made a similar mistake.

Politicians can hide the secrets of behind-the-scenes politics behind seven seals.

- Listen to me, you are all three. You interfere with what is forbidden. It's not safe. The fact that the dog guards is the secret of Professor Dumbledore and Nicholas Flamel!
- Nicholas Flamel?
- I said it in vain. I said it in vain...

Quote in English