I found myself giggling Wednesday evening as I danced for more than half an hour to some old school music. I really enjoyed the tracks from P. Diddy (as he was called then) and Heavy D.
It’s a pleasure to be carefree, to allow the tension flow away into the arms of some well crafted beats.
When I dance, I like dancing to the beats of the music, that is why I enjoy rap music and sentimental blues a lot. It’s been long since I listened to a track by Mary J Blige. Oh, is she heavenly. Asa also, she just has the gift.
Music is a product of maths, that I cannot deny. As I took the feet up and down, counting the beats, I thought the best musicians give one the illusion that the frequency of the beat was going to be steady and suddenly, there is a turn in the frequency, like some climax or critical point was reached. The beat changes, everyone raises their hands in the air.
Music is so beautiful. Take time and dance carefree once in a while and you’d understand why I had to write this blog. Just had to.
Search
THE QUESTION OF MORALITY, SCIENCE AND MY LOVE FOR MATHS.
Our world today, you must agree with me, is passing through a period where the morality of our institutions is being put into question. By institutions, I mean religious institutions. They signify so much of the amoral questions, materialism for one. It’s saddening that the very institutions that are supposed to provide moral leadership are failing the test.
So does science want to provide the answer?
I was reading this article:
morality: don’t be afraid – science can make us better . Although the article was interesting, I was not convinced that science is ready to take over the baton of moral leadership. Yet!
I don’t know if and when the time will come if there would be anything relevant to religion again? Science has been making so much progress in human development and evolution that sometimes one believes the fight is slowly coming the way of religion. The solutions provided by science, while mimicking creation, are so laudable, that only time will tell.
Even despite reservations about the ethics behind stem cell research, IVF and humans living outside the planet. I wonder what spirituality a homo sapiens would express living on mars for more than 365 days?
Also, there is the fear that as with the ever increasing conflicts in the theory about the origin of the earth, there surely will be conflicts in the theories science would propose in this direction. Take psychiatry and psychology for example. Those fields are replete with theories that change as the setting and rising of the sun.
Maths is part of science itself. Although I blog within the limits of high school maths, I know that there are lots of moral practices going on in the mind in solving an equation. The training behind solution finding itself can be compared to that given to a child on the ten commandments. I have observed how students react when they fail the answer to an equation. Although I cannot say there is a tinge of the conscience, yet the guilt written on their faces makes some never to come back to maths again.
Many people say maths is boring; so many say the ten commandments are boring also. Because so many persons are skeptical about these spiritual treasures do not make them so, or less important.
I rest my case on these points. I think it would be revolutionary if science finds some solutions to the moral question, then some of life’s mysterious question would be the subject of laboratory research.
So does science want to provide the answer?
I was reading this article:
morality: don’t be afraid – science can make us better . Although the article was interesting, I was not convinced that science is ready to take over the baton of moral leadership. Yet!
I don’t know if and when the time will come if there would be anything relevant to religion again? Science has been making so much progress in human development and evolution that sometimes one believes the fight is slowly coming the way of religion. The solutions provided by science, while mimicking creation, are so laudable, that only time will tell.
Even despite reservations about the ethics behind stem cell research, IVF and humans living outside the planet. I wonder what spirituality a homo sapiens would express living on mars for more than 365 days?
Also, there is the fear that as with the ever increasing conflicts in the theory about the origin of the earth, there surely will be conflicts in the theories science would propose in this direction. Take psychiatry and psychology for example. Those fields are replete with theories that change as the setting and rising of the sun.
Maths is part of science itself. Although I blog within the limits of high school maths, I know that there are lots of moral practices going on in the mind in solving an equation. The training behind solution finding itself can be compared to that given to a child on the ten commandments. I have observed how students react when they fail the answer to an equation. Although I cannot say there is a tinge of the conscience, yet the guilt written on their faces makes some never to come back to maths again.
Many people say maths is boring; so many say the ten commandments are boring also. Because so many persons are skeptical about these spiritual treasures do not make them so, or less important.
I rest my case on these points. I think it would be revolutionary if science finds some solutions to the moral question, then some of life’s mysterious question would be the subject of laboratory research.
MATHS IS NOT JUST ANOTHER ADDICTIVE RETREAT; IT IS BEAUTY.
We all know that the shortest distance between two points is a straight line. The equation for a straight line is really simple, isn’t it? y = mx + c, where m is the gradient and c is the y-intercept of the straight line.
One peculiarity about this equation, as of every other equation, is that the relational function does not take a direct one-to-one fit in the real world. I must digress, I was thinking along this lines before I heard of the death of the father of fractal geometry, Benoit Mandelbrot, who dedicated his life to searching for beauty in nature through mathematics.
Life would have been a simple beautiful equation if it follows the mathematical equations. Unfortunately, we are left with possibilities and factors and so on and so forth when we encounter the maths in the real world, especially where it comes to human relationships.
Let’s take an example of a family man. If it was easy to give one a family man and then we can interpret him as a good father or not, a good husband or not, then it would have been easy, but not so. Whatever interpretation we give to that man is dependent on whose opinion we are dependent upon. Why? Because he plays several roles in life. And so do all of us.
A family man plays the role of a husband to a woman, father to some children, breadwinner to these and to also other relations who are dependent on him, an employee or employer in a fictitious company, an in-law to an old grandpa and grandma resting their bones somewhere and all these factors have different interpretation of what he is or would have been based on how much relationship he has had with them.
He might be a good father but a bad employee; a lazy fighter but a strong talker; a good in-law but a selfish miser. Because he plays several roles, the maths from the dependent relations to his representation is not that easy. But that is why life is fun!
You think this is just another addictive retreat from the hard knocks of life, don’t you? Wait until you hear opinion on what you represent then you’d understand why the maths is not as simple as that.
One peculiarity about this equation, as of every other equation, is that the relational function does not take a direct one-to-one fit in the real world. I must digress, I was thinking along this lines before I heard of the death of the father of fractal geometry, Benoit Mandelbrot, who dedicated his life to searching for beauty in nature through mathematics.
Life would have been a simple beautiful equation if it follows the mathematical equations. Unfortunately, we are left with possibilities and factors and so on and so forth when we encounter the maths in the real world, especially where it comes to human relationships.
Let’s take an example of a family man. If it was easy to give one a family man and then we can interpret him as a good father or not, a good husband or not, then it would have been easy, but not so. Whatever interpretation we give to that man is dependent on whose opinion we are dependent upon. Why? Because he plays several roles in life. And so do all of us.
A family man plays the role of a husband to a woman, father to some children, breadwinner to these and to also other relations who are dependent on him, an employee or employer in a fictitious company, an in-law to an old grandpa and grandma resting their bones somewhere and all these factors have different interpretation of what he is or would have been based on how much relationship he has had with them.
He might be a good father but a bad employee; a lazy fighter but a strong talker; a good in-law but a selfish miser. Because he plays several roles, the maths from the dependent relations to his representation is not that easy. But that is why life is fun!
You think this is just another addictive retreat from the hard knocks of life, don’t you? Wait until you hear opinion on what you represent then you’d understand why the maths is not as simple as that.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)