I know, it’s a silly question, and of course, the answer is relative to your perspective, or to the question you’re asking, or to what you’re trying to get out of things. Still, though, whenever my head goes down that road of thought – the one that deems the question silly – it’s clearly coming from the analytic – maybe read complex – part of my brain that wants to break everything down and attach qualifiers to everything it sees. That’s the pro-complex side in the debate talking. It deems not only that the world is complex, but, more importantly, that this is whole question is worthless and unfocused because we have to get back to work and figure more things out.
Nonetheless, this little debate has stayed with me for quite some time – almost in a nostalgic sense, like a pop song that you like when you’re young, and as you return to it throughout life it takes on new meanings. I’m not sure what’s fueling it. I think it’s a nagging feeling that life is pretty simple, but we just make things artificially complicated for ourselves. That’s the pro-simple side of the debate. Recently I’ve been erring towards the simple side. Maybe it’s because I need to think less and do more.
But as I think about it more, the problem seems to be that when you look into phenomena, you can either raise more questions or consolidate phenomena. On some level many of us are familiar with both of these outcomes, and at times they go hand-in-hand. The ability to raise more questions is what drives knowledge – it’s that section at the end of a research paper that states future directions for your research; more importantly, it’s that intuitive feeling that the more you learn, the more you discover you don’t know.
And yet we’ve all had that feeling where we solve a problem, life is better, and, well, that’s that.
Although if the drive for knowledge ever became complacent in its footsteps – as if it were to accomplish some new feat, and say to itself, “That’s just what I was looking for. We’ve made such great progress that I feel like I can take a break for a while and bask in the glory of my achievements” – well, then it would have stopped a long time ago.
At the same time, this endless drive forward produces a more fragmentary and disconnected picture of things, where further endeavors become more exacting and less relevant. We’re back at the complicated side of things.
![](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjHdc7fawYGd6pdeY-fRSRqm1pw-XstNIU8bsWo3Um9x8eHhHRrxTPdM5YzKx_3CRAskJZhGaLO1Gi4CuLlF1w5l0HCsu7_s6MHUNRPA7JxAdbwbfYdFAuj4ck8pgZzMQWO8dm4E1AEccM/s320/1.jpg)
The saving grace is that all of these bits of explanations will eventually be consolidated, somehow sometime. The individual study of such disconnected areas as the color of pigeons, speciation of dogs, beaver dam-building, and barnacles might leave one with an incoherent view of things, but it left Darwin with the puzzle pieces to propose evolution by means of natural selection. For every system of Ptolemaic complexity I presume there must be a Copernican revolution waiting on the other end to fix things. It’s just that the turnaround time can be slow, and that the whole thing only becomes obvious in retrospect.
![](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgEFL5pBal4mdAiUtzzdUSWBiFC15CNnk_Oj26rDMsXgkN6880Cbb9QxP35o4l2WdKGpHuDDBYHouAdjkdbzQkjX2puvtV9I161d0mPklRpv0sEL36Sa8Oe3HcQulVD3kuuos13AxeiARs/s320/2.jpg)
From another perspective, the pro-simple side of me keeps wondering what that Copernican revolution
![](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhzru6nPbqIOwe1YDgFfCwNYIyeVUGPmB7_O4OpFV_5ibxSHhL9AwVrElhOgL1nG2iEQXFaG783gLhaAGj9NcEorucJ3hlM-uBkkGhyphenhyphen9qwX8L_zGON4JxjKFOWrZn5f73j8qgiuZiyfuFU/s320/3.jpg)
-KJ
______________
Media (in order of appearance)
Photo: (1), (2), Metamorphosis series by MC Escher; (3) S'more Peeps!, 03/03/2008, by Rory Finnerman;
Video: (1)Music video, from The Beatles 56 Channel, of the song "We Can Work it Out" by The Beatles, released as a 1965 single. Sphere: Related Content