We must re-learn to think !

Our thoughts have been constricted like constricting the horse with blinkers.

Our capacity to imagine is slowly changing into a limited capacity of following the Normal. Children are forced into thinking like the system. There is no problem with that, however, it is slowly killing imagination and taking down CREATIVITY with it.

We MUST think.

We MUST Reason.

We Must Conclude.

Think again.

Re-Reason.

Re-Conclude/Improvise.

Here, I would like to share a simple view of a simple arrangement from two different angles.

This will help us decide a location upon which we can create a space for THINKING.

Let us think about ‘thinking’

    “I think. Therefore, I am.”- Rene Descartes.

For many who have read this or heard this before, fail to see the beauty that Rene has captured in these words. For, he has completely simplified a question that has been left unanswered or unproven for many years. I understand that it sounds easy to some and vague to many, and its meaning is not as simple as you may think. You will have to go deeper to realise the gravity of his idea and it can be better understood if it is seen from another angle. Once you have done that, doubts and questions would start jumping in your head, i.e. if you are blessed with something that many think they lack in themselves- i.e. Common Sense.

So what is this other side?

“I don’t think, therefore I am not”..... What???

Firstly, it is impossible to think, that you don’t think. Because you are thinking anyway. So did I just make a fool out of myself? No, actually it is meant to be applied as a broader idea.
So what is this broader Idea?

Imagine a pen. Now a pen cannot think (which is only an assumption, it cannot be proved). So, it does not exist. But that is not the topic of my discussion as yet. How the pen does not exist is something for you to explore, I am only going to navigate your common sense into thinking more deeply about trivial things.

There is a methodology that we are going to use slightly in order to understand the ideas and thoughts more clearly. These are very essential.

1. The language used here will be made as easy as possible.

2. We will adopt a ‘systematic doubt approach’ strategy to arrive at our conclusions.

Systematic doubt approach is about cancelling all factors which put you in doubt, such that you are left with the best option.
Now, systematic doubt approach is not that easy to understand. But I will give you an example that would allow you to hang on it for a while.

Thomas Edison invented the Light bulb after trying two thousand times. When he was asked how he found out or when did he discover the idea that he could make a bulb ‘light’, he said
“I have found 1999 ways not to make a light bulb.”
(Story arranged to fit the situation. It is not exactly as it happened)

Now, Thomas was sticking to his idea and he found out all ways that would be unsuccessful in creating a light bulb and the result was his final idea which eventually worked. So if you try proving that the pen is not on the table you might eventually arrive at the decision that the pen is on the table, because it can’t be proved otherwise. However, here we don’t just talk about doubting in such simple scenarios alone. It is necessary that we doubt everything; our own self, our perception, our presence and even if anything else really existed.

So let me stimulate your senses by combining your knowledge and thoughts to think about THINKING.

My first approach is to give you an idea about how a person can look at things from different angles and not just by assuming the data that is installed in our heads. Our thinking process is usually limited to comparing what we perceive with existing data in our head and producing a logic that we understand.

For example, when we look at something that looks like a pen, our senses combine the data about what we are looking at. This data is passed on to our brain and we realise that this is a pen. We then confirm it by feeling it and writing with it. But if it doesn’t write, our thoughts quickly start calculating all the possibilities that this pen could be. You may say that it is a laser pen (used for pointing out things from a distance) or you may assume it to be a gun, or a gadget of some kind if it was found on 007’s table or batman’s breast pocket (batman doesn’t have a breast pocket, Bruce has the pocket). So our thinking is dependent on what our senses are conveying and then comparing the data with our existing recorded data. This means that everything that we actually understand is because we have something against it or about it already in our mind. But this idea is way too deep and requires much more understanding or research or thinking then that which you would have with a few pages of explanation.

Coming back to 'stimulating the common sense'.

Question1. Imagine a situation where we all are in a room. I am facing you as a speaker to the audience and I point out at a corner where a table is placed with a flower pot on it, and then I ask you- There is a table and on the table is a flower pot. Now, prove that the flower pot is on the table.

Start thinking. Don’t read the answers below until you have already exercised your mind into thinking as far as possible. Try to use the doubt approach.


Done?

Now, if I had been in this situation my answers would be these. Different people would have different answers to it. It is good if you have arrived at a logical conclusion with a proof.

So as the audience, I would answer with: -

Answer 1-You just said that there is a table with a flower pot on it. Hence, Proved.
Now, the above answer is smart and witty. It can get you applause. But take a look at the second answer.
Answer 2- There is no flower pot on the table. We are all trying to prove something that is not ON the table, and when the whole picture is seen, it is a different story. So the truth is that there is no pot on the table.

This is the kind of an answer that needs a proof.
So, how am I going to prove something that was crazy enough to be questioned in the first place? Simple, I am going to combine my knowledge and use my common sense to do it. Excited? So am I.

Proof –

If you look at the question, it is very incomplete in many senses. It does not bind you in any form to think further than required. The pot is on the table because we consider that anything is above (as in on top of) another, with respect to the ground or gravity. So in reality, the pot is on the table when you put your reference point as gravity or the ground or even the table.

Did anyone tell you in the question to assume the reference point to be the ground or gravity or the table? Then why are you still roaming in those ideas, step out.

I am going to prove something even crazier now. I am going to prove that the pot is not on the table but the table is on the pot. How? Read on. 

Imagine if you are looking at the pot on the table from space. You are so further away that you can see the whole spherical planet at a time and with high-tech stuff the table and the pot on the planet. You are not seeing any other obstacles for now. The imagination is expected to be something like this (look at Figure 1).

Figure 1

If you look fig 1 you will see that the table is on the earth and on it is the pot. The real question is this, what is the earth on?

Lost? The earth is not on anything as there is nothing here to relate the earth to. There is no point of reference at all. The table is on the earth and the pot on it because the earth is the selected reference point in this case. This is sufficient to prove my idea but I will go further to make it even more clear and amusing.
Now we are going to look at the whole idea again, but upside down.

Now look at Figure 2,

Figure 2

   Since, there is an absence of reference point we can change to this view. Now the complex part begins. On earth it may seem exactly like before. The pot is on the table. However, if our reference is north and south of the planet as per geographical or astronomical data we will see that when the table is placed on the south the whole situation changes. As you can see from the diagram, the table is on the pot and on the table is our planet earth.
Since, there are no real or physical reference points as North or South but only conventional, we can say that at any point it can be said that the table is on the pot and the earth on the table.

Hence, Proved.

This was just an example. This should be your approach towards thinking. If this article of mine has given you a feeling that you must explore life in a similar manner and if it has made you think about something in a different but logical way and if it has ignited in you any form of interest, then I have succeeded in inviting you to explore the world of lateral thinking.

You can now proceed to the next threads. Comments are welcome.

There are other levels of thought which we could have explored and discussed. we could have moved on to argue whether we ourselves exist or not before we question the pot and the table.

But the purpose of the article is only to show an option and create this ray of escape into the world of Imagination and Creativity. Great number of inventions and discoveries were a result of creativity followed by examination and experimentation.

IRSHAN AHMAD