“All reality is interactional.”
This is a quote from Dr. Carlo Rovelli, the Italian physicist, who was the guest of Krista Tippett of On Being on March 16, 2017.
One of the examples he uses is a kiss versus a stone. The stone, he says, is a thing. The kiss is not a thing in that, once it has passed, one can point to and say, “There is the kiss.” Yet, it was one’s reality and is certainly remembered as real. If it was a forced kiss it may be remembered as a very negative reality. If it was a welcomed kiss it is remembered as a positive reality. If it was perfunctory it will be remembered as just that sort of reality.
While listening to this podcast I was reminded of the age-old argument about the sound of a tree falling in the forest. If there is no one there to hear it does it make a sound? Certainly, if there is no human reality but one would supposed to some animals there is the experience of sound.
Mr. Rovelli is not, of course, suggesting that the stone does not exist but he does seem to be suggesting that the stone becomes real for a human as she/she observes it, possibly lifts it, pounds it into dust or otherwise has some level of interaction with the object we choose to call in English a stone. Further and what is most important, perhaps, is the nature of the interaction which in turn may set off a series of interactions. For example, my interaction with the stone may result in an effect on someone else which in turn affects others which ….
I was attempting to remind someone the other day that if person x experiences a comment y makes as negative, the reality for person x is that the comment was negative. Stating this as reality for person x does not say anything about the intention of person y. It merely states the reality for person x and not an objective reality for everyone who might have heard the statement. For some it may have been heard as a simple statement of fact. For others, it may be being heard as a mirror for how they sometimes communicate. The possibilities are endless.
The problem is not that reality is an interaction. The problem, of course, occurs when one insists that reality must be agreed upon or shared. If we revisit the kiss I mentioned earlier, if one person insists that anything beyond the fact that they shared a kiss has to be shared reality then an argument might break out and/or hurt feelings might arise.
I was very interested in the meeting between President Trump and Chancellor Merkel of Germany which took place on March 17, 2017. Although one has no idea of what Chancellor Merkel was thinking or feeling, I was impressed that she seemed to be able to refrain from reacting to him. She may or may not have heard some of this comments as negative. She may have heard them as nothing more than an attempt for a negative alliance. She may have heard him as just being Trump and thus deserving of no response. Her reality might have been that she must find a way to educate or work with this man. If her reality has been that he insulted her or her country and she “had” to react, there would be no hope of eventually finding common ground and working with him.
I have previously written about the fact that we process sound, light and other stimulants through our brains. Dr. Rovelli is suggesting that if we want to gain a more accurate and helpful understanding of the world we need to be aware that our reality is formed by our interactions and how we interrupt those interactions. All of one’s preconceived notions about the world must be suspended if one is to grow in understanding and, thus, in one’s relationship to the universe(s). The very nature of physics – “the science of the nature and properties of matter and energy” (dictionary.com) requires a dynamic, every changing relationship. The same is true of human’s interactions with each other and the rest of “nature.”
Written March 18, 2017
This is a quote from Dr. Carlo Rovelli, the Italian physicist, who was the guest of Krista Tippett of On Being on March 16, 2017.
One of the examples he uses is a kiss versus a stone. The stone, he says, is a thing. The kiss is not a thing in that, once it has passed, one can point to and say, “There is the kiss.” Yet, it was one’s reality and is certainly remembered as real. If it was a forced kiss it may be remembered as a very negative reality. If it was a welcomed kiss it is remembered as a positive reality. If it was perfunctory it will be remembered as just that sort of reality.
While listening to this podcast I was reminded of the age-old argument about the sound of a tree falling in the forest. If there is no one there to hear it does it make a sound? Certainly, if there is no human reality but one would supposed to some animals there is the experience of sound.
Mr. Rovelli is not, of course, suggesting that the stone does not exist but he does seem to be suggesting that the stone becomes real for a human as she/she observes it, possibly lifts it, pounds it into dust or otherwise has some level of interaction with the object we choose to call in English a stone. Further and what is most important, perhaps, is the nature of the interaction which in turn may set off a series of interactions. For example, my interaction with the stone may result in an effect on someone else which in turn affects others which ….
I was attempting to remind someone the other day that if person x experiences a comment y makes as negative, the reality for person x is that the comment was negative. Stating this as reality for person x does not say anything about the intention of person y. It merely states the reality for person x and not an objective reality for everyone who might have heard the statement. For some it may have been heard as a simple statement of fact. For others, it may be being heard as a mirror for how they sometimes communicate. The possibilities are endless.
The problem is not that reality is an interaction. The problem, of course, occurs when one insists that reality must be agreed upon or shared. If we revisit the kiss I mentioned earlier, if one person insists that anything beyond the fact that they shared a kiss has to be shared reality then an argument might break out and/or hurt feelings might arise.
I was very interested in the meeting between President Trump and Chancellor Merkel of Germany which took place on March 17, 2017. Although one has no idea of what Chancellor Merkel was thinking or feeling, I was impressed that she seemed to be able to refrain from reacting to him. She may or may not have heard some of this comments as negative. She may have heard them as nothing more than an attempt for a negative alliance. She may have heard him as just being Trump and thus deserving of no response. Her reality might have been that she must find a way to educate or work with this man. If her reality has been that he insulted her or her country and she “had” to react, there would be no hope of eventually finding common ground and working with him.
I have previously written about the fact that we process sound, light and other stimulants through our brains. Dr. Rovelli is suggesting that if we want to gain a more accurate and helpful understanding of the world we need to be aware that our reality is formed by our interactions and how we interrupt those interactions. All of one’s preconceived notions about the world must be suspended if one is to grow in understanding and, thus, in one’s relationship to the universe(s). The very nature of physics – “the science of the nature and properties of matter and energy” (dictionary.com) requires a dynamic, every changing relationship. The same is true of human’s interactions with each other and the rest of “nature.”
Written March 18, 2017
RSS Feed