CreatorWorship

        During a few sleepless moments last night a nebulous concept began to condense into a question within my mind.  What is the basic unit of a thought?   Or to put it another way, of what is a thought composed?

          In order to communicate the complexity of the question as I am considering it fully awake let me begin by relating an analogy.  As a Biology teacher at present, I teach students many parts or units of structure and function.  One example is the protein.  The protein is the basic unit of function for accomplishing tasks within a cell.  A protein is twisted into a specific shape that enables it to function properly because of an exact sequence of sub-units called amino acids.  Imagine a necklace of differing color and shape of stones all tangled up as it sits in a jewelry box.  But the amino acids have parts called atoms and atoms are made of smaller parts yet (Being an analogy I will leave it to the nuclear physicists to parse quarks and strings, and energy, what ever that is.).  Which part or piece is the basic unit?  Is it the smallest part or is it the association of parts that function as a unit?  Is it the atom that makes up the protein or the protein that functions as a whole, or is it the amino acid of which the protein is composed?

          An example of a ……. an idea might help.  Several days ago my wife and I were taking a pleasant and brisk walk on a cool evening in our small town.  As we approached an intersection near the town square someone passed us.  As I squinted in the evening sun I caught a whiff of cigarette smoke.  Now I have smelled cigarette smoke in many contexts over my nearly 50 years but at this moment I was immediately translated in mind to the pavement, crowds, rides, sounds, and sights of the Tennessee Valley A & I Fair in Knoxville, walking beside my father as a child.  I have heard that odors constitute the most thorough associations and memories and, by the way, I would not have thought any good association would be in my mind from tobacco smoke.  Was the TV A&I Fair-cigarette smoke complex a thought or was the cigarette smoke the thought that drew along in its vapors many rapid fire associations?

          If thought is as simple as a transistor switch on a microchip where one state results in an “on” switch and the other state results in an “off” switch, then the basic unit of thought is the most simple differentiation of this but not that, black not white.  But perhaps thoughts must need to be a functioning unit to exist or be remembered or be used.

          At some point in time a young child discovers the concept of two.  Perhaps his mother was carrying him to the bathtub for his Saturday evening bath.  The procedure included her handing him his yellow rubber ducky.  He gets so excited about the bath that she can hardly hold onto him.  Because this procedure is a time honored tradition in the family, the pair pass his older brother coming out of the bathroom, wrapped in a towel, carrying his yellow rubber ducky.  He squeals and raises his ducky toward his brother’s who reciprocates with a tap of the two toys together.  Having made this discovery, is the thought of “two” (of course devoid of word or Arabic numeral or math at this point) a complex association of bath, brother, mom, ducky, and so forth, or is it a mere recognition of two duckies?  It seems as though “two” generalized to number of siblings or number of dissimilar toys is a future and further association which may amend or truncate or revise “two”.  But is the thought of two from that point in the subconscious mind of this man a reflection on the set of associations surrounding rubber duckies or is it a continually revised concept that is both increasing in complexity by associations and simplified in the basic idea of what “two” is?

          Is the basic unit of thought static or dynamic, a complex association or a singular point?  And despite the consternation of the materialist is the complexity of thinking a suggestion that the whole is more than the sum of its parts?  Is there any suggestion from these musings or deeper study that thought has a deeper Source than chemical reactions, associations, and natural selection?  Just a thought.

Read Full Post »

Nevertheless!  Look at it.  It looks and sounds like a word that ought to be deposited in the dust bin with archaic words like heretofore.  But look closer because this word still shows up with fair frequency, particularly if you are trying to make a strong point involving persistance or perseverance. What does it mean and why the contorted three word compound?  The dictionary says it means, “in spite of that, yet, notwithstanding” and “however, nonetheless”.  We frequently exchange the word regardless for nevertheless.  But that denotes refusal to take into account circumstances.  Nevertheless considers the circumstances but disallows them to lessen the results. An awesome or the terrifying situation happens but ‘never the less’ is my resolve or joy in completing what I ought and want to do .  Any circumstance will not ever diminish or reduce the result of my action, conviction, or His promise.  Consider a few concrete examples: 1. “I can do all things through Him who strengthens me. Nevertheless, you have done well to share with me in my affliction.” (Phillippians 4:14)  Phillippians, the help you gave me is not ever lessened by the fact that God enables me to do all things. Afterall, He may have enabled me through you, for instance.  2. “For thus says the Lord God, ‘I will also do with you as you have done, you who have despised the oath by breaking the covenant. Nevertheless, I will remember My covenant with you in the days of your youth, and I will establish an everlasting covenant with you.” (Exekiel 16:59-60)  I promise that I will punish you because you have not only not held up your end of the agreement but did it (not accidently) while hating the agreement (and Me).  That in no way ever diminishes the fact that I will carry out my agreement with you as I promised.  3. “But I say to you, the rest who are in Thyatira, who do not hold this teaching, who have not known the deep things of Satan, as they call them- I place no other burden on you. Nevertheless, what you have, hold fast until I come.” (Revelation 2:24-25)  Even though I have no reprimand for you like the rest of the church at Thyatira, do not allow that to ever reduce your watchfulness and resolve in clinging to your faith and your Lord.  4. Or consider the words of the recent song by Mercy Me, “Such a tiny offering compared to Calvary, nevertheless, we lay it at Your feet.”  My worship is so insignificant compared to your work on the cross for me, but that does not lessen at all the command or my desire to offer in the words of the Psalm 50:14, “the sacrifice of thanksgiving”.

Heretofore I have endeavored to deepen your thinking about nevertheless, notwithstanding that the language daily decays in the mouths of its users. One English teacher I know would turn over in her grave (if it were not for that the fact that she ain’t dead yet) to see me trying to cogitate on conjunctive adverbs, but I have trouble helping myself. It doesn’t seem like these words should exist, complicated as they are, but we have trouble making connections between states of being or action without them.  Words like whatsoever and hereto and so forth do the job wonderfully if only we understand how they make the connection.  I think that they are fun to explore. I hope nevertheless that the above examples will encourage you in His promises and your resolve based on them.

Read Full Post »

In the movie “Prince Caspian”, conflict and near ruin come because two important characters clash. The first character, Peter, is the oldest of four and was once the high king of Narnia. The other character, Caspian, is an orphaned, only child, who has had his throne robbed. The clash comes when Caspian, who’s the one who positioned his troops in and around Aslan’s How, wants to stay and defend his stronghold. However, Peter wants Caspian to move his army to attack the Telmarine’s castle. Caspian feels jealousy for Peter’s already-stated authority, feeling that he should command his own army. In the end he gives in to Peter’s plan. While the plan is already underway, Caspian decides to change Peter’s plans, feeling that his role is too small, by saving Doctor Cornelius. Caspian, after nearly killing his uncle, Miraz, gets a horse for himself, the Doctor, and one for Peter. Peter, thinking that his own skill and valor can win the battle, hangs on to that feeling at the cost of ‘his’ troops. Peter, finally seeing that the battle is lost, calls a retreat, but part of ‘his’ army gets trapped and killed by the Telmarines. When they get back to Aslan’s How, Peter and Caspian flare violently at each other. Peter, who feels the blow to his selfish pride, is somewhat humbled by his loss of his self-glory in the losing of a battle. He is angry at his own mistakes and Caspian’s, and he takes his anger out on Caspian. Caspian is angry at the loss of his troops, and thinking it useful he points out in a very bad tempered way that if they had followed his plan his troops would still be alive. Both Peter and Caspian are brave, skillful warriors, noble in action and speech and have taken upon themselves great responsibility. Peter loves his brother and sisters and the land of Narnia, but he is somewhat proud. Up until recently Caspian has not felt love for anyone except Doctor Cornelius. Caspian is somewhat bad tempered. In the end both Peter and Caspian are humbled. Peter is humbled when Edmund, not him, shatters the chance of the White Witch’s return, and when Susan and Lucy remind him that Aslan is the way to victory. Caspian is humbled when he realizes that his hate is destroying him. In the very end Caspian regains his rightful throne and Peter returns to his own world. The conflict was resolved when Peter forgives Caspian and lets him keep the High King’s sword.

Read Full Post »

While I was administering a read aloud End of Course Test my thougths would wonder and gaze focus through the window to the dimly seen mountains in the distance while the student was considering and answering. This is a3 hour affair afterall: you, a student, a proctor, silence, no reading, no writing. One can understand random thoughts at a time like this- who’s worried about boredom, sanity is the point! One thing the student was doing tipped off a flow of consciousness similar to what follows (recorded later for posterity):

Punnet Squares and Nautilus fractals 

Kepler’s Planetary Laws and Newton’s for gravitation and motion

Net forces yet balanced, accelerations

Precisely balanced interaction of fundamental forces

Fundamentals, harmonics, and resolutions

Ratios of mass and atoms, atomic numbers and stable isotopes proceeding from neutron/proton ratios

Golden means and symmetries of body parts for balance, function, and beauty

Concentrations and equilibrium constants

Le Chatier balance and population pressures and triple points

French curves and planer and solid geometric equations

Coefficients of friction and laminar flow

Inertias, momentums, forces, energies, powers, efficiencies

Optical magnification, indices of refraction, and chromatic aberrations

Ohm’s Law, Coulomb’s Law, Kirchoff’s Laws

Integrations, derivations, trignometric relationships

Bernoulli’s, Boyle’s, Charles’, Gay-Lussac’s, Archimedes’, Pascal’s, Universal Gas Laws and Principles

Kinetic Theory and Collision Theory

Conservation of Energy, Matter, Momentum, and, Charge

What do these few ideas have in common? The Mathmetician has written into the fabric, solved simultataneously, and applied universally the equations…. the Infinite Algorithm!

(P.S. I know some of you like-minded types can add to this list…. come on, you know you want to.)

Read Full Post »