setarcos
The hopeful or the hopeless?
Indirectly is the key here. And even that indirectly is actually only algorithmic models used to imaginatively visualize what we can't see. So while we might observe the effects and creatively determine their causes, the actual causes remain clothed in obscurity and theoretical.We can indirectly see subatomic particles, or see results of what they do.
What I find fascinating here is that human beings, being finite, and very limited creatures are compelled to determine what can't be without any proof either way. No logical proof, no scientific proof, no proof what so ever. This to me is testament to being like a fish in a bowl, bound to our own biases of what reality must be even though the one thing humans have shown definitively is that they only know a fraction of that reality.It would be nice if things like gods, pink unicorns, etc were objective things but they aren't
Another fascinating thing to me....millions of people from all walks of life experience strange things which they cannot explain with current knowledge of how things should work regardless of the level of education, occupation, religion, age, or sex and that experience often leads them to ridicule, deterioration of health, loss of friends, job, or even their life, and yet they are unwavering in their insistence on the truth of their experience. And millions more dismiss that experience by insisting on pigeonholing that experience into explanations they feel most comfortable with, without any proof.as long as people use them to benefit themselves and not pretend everyone must see them.
That to me is evidence of the inherent flaw of the human hubris of thinking we know what must be, can be, and absolutely is without question.
I don't think its an insistence on seeing "them" whatever "them" is. I think to these people its more of an insistence on recognizing the legitimacy of their unique experiences.
Unfortunately - I think its unfortunate - we cannot legitimize unique experiences until we have them ourselves. And only then the experience we have. In the mean while, in the absence of proof we shouldn't outright dismiss the experience others say they have had simply because we disagree with its possibility. That's not to say that we have to agree with the experiencers interpretation of that experience but then again discussion of those possibilities without bias should make for wonderful communion between common beings on the reality they find themselves a part of.