« Atomic Folly | Rowell Hoff's Blog | Comments on recent history »

Sky


By day we looked up and it was blue, with the sun in it and, dimly, the moon. When the sun descended, blue became black, and the moon and stars were moving in it. We called it whatever we called it in our divers tongues. Sky. We see it still, but differently now because of what we have learned.

Some of us once saw the stars as holes in the sky where light came through. Some of us located sun, moon, stars and planets on several concentric spheres. The sun, we learned, does not revolve around the earth, nor does anything else except the moon. The sky is not an object and the blue is something that happens to the light. Now we know: moon around our earth, planets, asteroids, comets, etc. around our sun, stars around the galactic center, stars with planets in orbit, galaxies further than we could once imagine. We have not finished learning about these things; we are at the beginning of learning.

We began a little while ago to learn that the earth is indeed surrounded by concentric spheres, not blue or black: the ionosphere, parts of which reflect some radio waves, making them available beyond the line of sight; the ozone layer that keeps out harmful radiation, except what comes in through the holes; the magnetosphere with its radiation belts; the layers of the atmosphere, troposphere, stratosphere, mesosphere, thermosphere; and so on.

Some of us and some of our machines have penetrated and gone beyond earth's sky.

This is a metaphor for truth, and an example of it.


10 Comments

| Leave a comment
user-pic

Incredible metaphor. I love it! Thank you.

user-pic

Yes, a nice metaphor. I have a poster about truth on my office wall, "The truth will set you free, but first it will make you miserable." I do not recall the author, in fact I do not think the phrase is credited.

So many people do not even take the time (or feel they have the time and a moment of peace) to even look at the sky. They are frantically absorbed in fighting the windmill of the day, and dealing with the barrage of information and statistics that flow into and out of our lives on a second to second basis with avalanche like aggression.

Often, sad Truth gets lost somewhere in the shuffle. Few even recognize her when she does appear for a brief moment riding atop the avalanche's flow.

user-pic

I had to Google it. President Garfield. No idea what he was complaining about. May we all take the time to look up.

user-pic

I sometimes refer to the fact that man once believed based on information that the earth was flat and that 'this' was the truth as a way to point out that there are different perspectives and 'therefor' experiences of truth. In this example that truth was overcome by new facts that provided a different 'truth', the earth is sphere shaped.
And it is said that the indians on the Cayman Islands could not see Christoper Columbus's ships arriving because they had not concept of the reality of such a thing existing. Another limitation of perception... not acknowledging, or recognizing things that appear outside our sense of reality or truth.

The truth is often evasive and not agreed upon because of our human nature and the nature of mind and experience. I see it as our responsibility to report from our direct experience so that we can hone in on some kind of co-created, sense of reality that we can agree on:)

The sky and beyond are also present and elusive as truth can be. Thanks again for sharing this.

user-pic

To be precise, there was not really any "information" about Earth's flatness, merely the absence of information contradicting this somewhat reasonable assumption.

(And, contrary to popular belief, scientific minds have known or suspected Earth to have been round at least from the Greek times.)

user-pic

Regardless, to be precise, people believed the earth to be flat at one time based on information and this changed with new information/facts and this is still true regardless of what you have stated here Karl.

user-pic

But because they believed the earth to be flat did not make it true. They were mistaken; they believed something because they didn't know any better. That isn't truth; that is lack of truth -- through no fault of their own -- but still it was never truth.

user-pic

That's the point CVille... we believe things to be true based on what we know in a given moment... until new information sheds a light on what we once knew and a new truth arises.

user-pic

But if you learn that what you once believed is false, it was NEVER true.

Are you saying that there are "old truths" (which are wrong, but because someone once believed them they still can be called 'true' even if they never were, actually, um...true?), as opposed to "new truths?"

Believing whole-heartedly in something simply doesn't make it true.

For example, I don't believe that if a suicide bomber blows up a bunch of people in a pizza parlor in the name of his religion; that he will be rewarded with 70 virgins once he is all put back together again in heaven. The bomber obviously believes it enough to give up his life for it. Does that make it true?

user-pic

I am saying as 'sky' suggests is that truth evolves with new information. What I know to be true right now could be proven false with new information/evidence. It happens throughout our lives. Does that mean I should assume everything I know to be true to be false...no, but it does give me a little more openness in my mind realizing that it's possible.

As beliefs of religion and faith etc. I simply see the idea of the virgins as one persons way of attempting to describe and understand aspects of mystery. I have my own understanding and it may change.

Leave a comment

Share
Close Social Web Email

"To" Email Address

Your Name

Your Email Address