Absolute verse complete knowledge, is there a scale?

This is really a way out there metaphysical or philosophical question, to most it will appear meaningless, a question about something deeper than most care about as it rarely effects anyone's day to day life. Here is the question, lets say you had the choice between understanding one thing completely and knowing everything just shy of perfect, which would you choose and where would the line be drawn? Now lets say that there was a range, you could know more and more things perfectly if you chose to know the rest imperfectly, would you know where to set the range?

Let us say that the reality of eternity meant eternal change and you had to decide what that meant for you. Would you want to know everything and learn nothing or be the dumbest person in the universe and learn it last? Would you want to know the answer or struggle through the process of learning the answer and arriving at it for yourself?

reply to post by AQuestion


A star, I expected nobody would respond. I just wanted to toss out a hypothetical. Thank you for starring me whoever you are. Peace.

reply to post by AQuestion


Interesting hypothetical. If i took the option for instant expansion of knowledge i would want to know what risks come with that offer. The first risk is boredom. If i know everything why would i go seek any new information. Another risk is restless nights as with all that information would i be thinking about it continuously. There is no easy answer to your OP hypothetical because there are many variables which will alter the persons pyscology and social characteristics as they aquire more knowledge.

The first step in making my own map is to get my bearings.

Cosmogony
Emanation theology
the Idea of scale, and scalar



Cosmogony: (or cosmogeny) is any scientific theory concerning the coming into existence, or origin, of the cosmos or universe, or about how what sentient beings ...
wiki/Cosmogony

Emanation theology: (literally "dripping") is a belief, found in Neoplatonism, that the cause of certain beings or states of being consists of an overflow from the essence of God or other higher spiritual beings, as opposed to a special act of creation. This overflow is usually conceived in a non-temporal way as a permanent relationship of causation rather than as an event causing an entity to come into existence at a given point in time. The word "emanation" can refer either to the process of emanation or to the thing emanated.

Equivalent concepts are found in Gnosticism and in Kabbalah (Jewish mysticism).

wiki/Emanation_(Eastern_Orthodox_Christianity)



The Idea of scale, and scalar

There is a legendary scene in the blockbuster "Jaws" where the camera zooms in on chief Brody sitting on the beach. A moment of panic. To get the shot, a track was laid,
and the camera was rolled at high speed directly towards the actors head. Normally the person would quickly drop out of focus. But with a twistable zoom lens Spielberg was able to adjust the focus as the camera approached. The effect is a nearly subliminal optical illusion. The chiefs head stays the same size, and in focus, but the beach and the people behind him, change scale.
While sitting still,
it appears as though the world is swallowing him.

This is one case of scale being a profound influence on reality,
which I feel is the thesis in the opening post.

The question posed seems to be
couched in a scalar cosmogony,
where scale itself is the
source of all knowing.

If that is the case,
no 1 is greater than any other 1.

But I get the feeling you are more interested in grouping humanity
into categories larger than 1.


Mike Grouchy

reply to post by AthlonSavage


Dear AthlonSavage,

Thanks for the thoughtful reply. I will disagree with something, all answers are simple once you know your truth, your choice. It is the learning process that keeps eternity at bay and with it boredom. What if God was the totality of knowledge and split himself into pieces while retaining his totality? What if the universe was God attempting to understand himself by understanding his parts and we were his parts trying understand him? That can mess with your head; but, more importantly what would that mean for each of us in trying to understand the totality if it meant the totality understood it's parts first? Pretty messed up metaphysics from a Christian, lol.

reply to post by mikegrouchy


Dear mikegrouchy,

Fair enough, lets play. What if you have a puzzle with 100 pieces, a picture of a house. Now, each piece is true, it is an accurate representation of the part that it is. Now, each piece has to be connected to another piece, one that fits it; but, as you are putting the pieces together the person in charge of the picture begins looking at more and more things, it looks at the house next door and the total picture has thereby becoming bigger since you began. You will eventually get the first picture right, given unlimited time; but, you will never understand the whole in advance of it existing. I did say I was getting metaphysical.

Shhhhhhhh.

Don't disturb the universe,
I'm still trying to fit all 100 pieces together,
but it looks like the universe is so flattered it's making new ones.


Mike Grouchy

Originally posted by mikegrouchy
Shhhhhhhh.

Don't disturb the universe,
I'm still trying to fit all 100 pieces together,
but it looks like the universe is so flattered it's making new ones.

Mike Grouchy

Dear Mike Grouchy,

In the time it took you to reply, there were 117 pieces.