Whether one is free or not is a question determined by the relationship between the inner motives expressed through one’s actions and the external world as the stage for those actions. In other words, the degree of human freedom is judged by the extent to which the motives expressed as actions are permitted by the conditions of the external world. Since the self is the ultimate cause of the inner motives expressed as actions, when we speak of freedom, we must first define the self. Therefore, in this chapter, we will define the self.
The self is, first and foremost, the subject of all actions. Second, the self is the subject of cognition. Third, the self is the premise of existence and the premise of cognition. Fourth, the self is an indirect object of cognition. Fifth, the self is an ideal and spiritual existence.
The self is existence. The body is merely a medium. The self and the body must not be confused.
The self is the subject of all actions. In other words, it is the initiator and the principal agent of all actions. It is also the subject of cognition towards all objects and the only subject on earth.
The initiator of all actions means the ultimate cause of all actions, and the principal agent means the decision-maker and actor of all actions. The decision-maker and actor mean the internal entity that executes and controls the movement of the body to express the self’s existence to the external world. The principal agent means the entity that can embody the self’s existence, making it recognizable to external objects through the body. The subject of cognition means the internal entity that ultimately recognizes and distinguishes objects in cognition. Such a subjective existence does not exist outside the self.
No matter what external factors may induce or trigger it, it is the self that directly initiates actions. It is the self that recognizes and distinguishes external objects and phenomena.
Meeting people, falling in love, awakening to love, knowing love, confessing and expressing those feelings—all these must be done by oneself. No matter how much others eat, one’s own stomach will not be filled, and no matter how much others recommend something, if one dislikes it, it remains disliked. No matter how much parents like someone or how much others praise them, there are people one cannot love, and conversely, there are people one cannot help but love, no matter how much others oppose. Such actions and feelings cannot be replaced by others. As long as one is concerned about the eyes of others, one cannot understand true love. The form of marriage does not guarantee love. It is the irresistible feelings that compel one to act. To fall in love means to lose oneself. And one’s happiness is something one must grasp with one’s own efforts. This is because all human actions are rooted in the self, and the self is inherently a subjective existence.
It is the self that recognizes and ultimately distinguishes objects. The subject of cognition is the ultimate internal entity that perceives, recognizes, distinguishes, and remembers objects. However, the self does not mean the knowledge, values, or remembered content, but the entity that actually forms and executes such things. Please be careful not to confuse this point.
Object recognition is always done based on the self as the basic unit. Therefore, official values and recognition are merely the sum of the self’s values and are always relative. This is because object recognition changes according to the relative position of the subject of cognition, and it is impossible to replace it with an absolute position.
In other words, when recognizing an arbitrary object, it is impossible to recognize the entirety of the object from a fixed viewpoint, and the viewpoint must inevitably be shifted. Since there is no absolute position that can distinguish objects from a fixed viewpoint, recognition must be relative. And since recognition is relative, the values derived from it are also relative. Therefore, the science created by humans is relative.
However, it is not the objects that are relative, but the recognition that is relative, so please do not misunderstand. I would like to elaborate on this later.
At the root of all actions is the self. And all actions prove the existence of the self. The self does not exist to think, but because it thinks, the self exists. The self does not exist to eat, but because the self exists, it eats. The existence of the self is self-evident, and it is not given meaning for other purposes. Actions merely prove its existence. Actions do not define the existence of the self.
All actions are subjectively performed based on the self-evident self, and all object recognition is based on the self. All purposes and goals are issued from the internal motives of the self and realized through actions, based on the existence of the self. Therefore, the self takes precedence over all existence, and actions prove the existence of the self.
Any value judgment or decision-making presupposes the decision-maker, the subject and master of judgment and decision, and the actor, the subject and master of action. Only the self can express the self. Such an existence of the self cannot be denied even by the reality of death, regardless of the existence of the afterlife.
Freedom is a concept based on such subjectivity of the self, and the importance of freedom lies in the fact that the loss of freedom leads to the loss of the self. Therefore, establishing freedom means establishing and maintaining the subjectivity of the self, and fighting for freedom even at the cost of life is the only proof of living.
Whether one desires it or not, one’s actions ultimately come down to one’s own judgment. What one does, even if it is following someone else’s instructions or orders, is ultimately based on one’s own judgment. Even if one succumbs to threats or pressure and does something against one’s will, it does not justify one’s actions. If one goes against one’s will, one will be tormented by that guilt for life. And the only way to escape that suffering is to regain freedom. This is because even the reality of death cannot deny the existence of the self.
The self is both the subject of cognition and an indirect object of cognition.
The self, as a subjective existence, cannot be an objective or direct object of cognition as it is. Object recognition does not necessarily require some kind of mediation, but self-recognition requires some kind of mediator.
One cannot directly see one’s own face with one’s own eyes. One must reflect one’s face in a mirror and objectify it once. This relationship between the self and the mediator is called the mirror image relationship.
To recognize the self means that the same existence performs both the subjective act of recognizing and the objective act of being recognized. This phenomenon, where the subjective act of doing and the objective act of being done occur simultaneously in the same existence, is called the action-reaction in recognition.
The self is an ideal and spiritual existence and does not have a material substance. The body and the self are separate and must not be identified as the same. Therefore, in self-recognition, the body is merely one of the mediators. Similarly, values and knowledge must not be identified with the self.
The self refers only to the existence of the self itself and must be distinguished from the values, knowledge, and body that are incidentally derived from the existence of the self. Therefore, the self can exist independently of the passage of time and the external world, making it an absolute existence.
Values, knowledge, and the body certainly change over time, making them relative. However, the existence of the self does not change even if values, knowledge, and the body change. Humans live until they die, and whether the self is lost after death cannot be proven. As long as the self exists now, it is meaningless to question it.
The self exists now, and the past is merely the trajectory of the self, while the future remains an uncertain speculation. Living humans are not yet dead.
Humans should consider the best way to be based on the certain facts of the present. If one bases arguments on ambiguous matters, even certain things will become ambiguous. One must not lose sight of the present self by being caught up in the past, which is the trajectory of the self, nor should one bend one’s beliefs out of fear of an uncertain future. What is certain for us now is the fact that we are alive, and both the past and the future are only necessary to know what form we should take now. And there is neither life nor death, neither good nor evil, neither past nor present. Only the unique and absolute existence remains.
Such absoluteness of self-existence gives rise to absolute recognition of existence. However, absolute recognition of existence alone cannot distinguish objects. Therefore, the self selects an arbitrary system, objectifies existence by relativizing it, and distinguishes objects. Once existence is relativized, absolute recognition becomes the premise of recognition, becomes latent, and is eventually forgotten. Human thought then becomes primarily about distinguishing through arbitrary systems and constructing logic, and the absoluteness of the self and existence is lost from that system. Also, because the self is a subject, it cannot be objectified or materialized like life, soul, or spirit, nor can it be generalized. The existence of the self must be ideal and specific. Therefore, it cannot be denied or interfered with by the existence or absence of objectified things like the body or by relativized systems. The existence of the self is complete in itself.
The object is pure. In other words, the object is an undefined and meaningless existence. Meaning arises from recognizing the object and presupposing it. Objects are equal. Discrimination and differentiation inevitably arise in the process of identifying objects. Objects are infinite. What is finite is the ability of the self to identify objects. Therefore, the initial recognition of the existence of an object must be unconditional. Every premise of meaning has an implicit understanding of the existence of the object. The self extracts meaning from the pure object based on the premise of unconditional object recognition. However, no matter how much meaning is extracted from the object, the essence of the object cannot be changed. The purity of the object is absolute.
Recognition of the existence of an object is made through the attributes of the object. The existence of the object is pure and absolute. Such an existence of the object cannot be identified. It is merely the premise of all recognition. Moreover, the existence of such an object itself cannot be directly perceived. What we can perceive are the attributes of the object. We intuitively perceive the existence of the object by perceiving its attributes. Therefore, the existence of the object is also an indirect object of recognition.
Even if a person changes their name for some reason, it may slightly affect their fate, but it does not change their essence. Even if a person grows and their appearance or thoughts change, their existence does not change. The existence of the object is continuous. That is, the phenomena we perceive are the attributes of the object, and the attributes of the object are relative.
Meaning arises from the necessity of the self, such as identifying objects and communicating intentions with others, and is not directly related to the existence of the object itself, whether it is symbolizing the object or transmitting intentions. Moreover, meaning pertains to the attributes of the object, and meaning affects the object only after it is directly linked to the object, that is, after the object has meaning. Objects before they have meaning are meaningless.
If a person has no relation to oneself, it does not matter what that person thinks of oneself. The other person becomes meaningful to oneself only after they have some relation to oneself. Moreover, the existence of the other person is not influenced by whether one knows them or not.
The existence of the object is universal, and change is merely a function of time. The self lives in the present, and the object exists in the present.
The fact that Napoleon died does not negate Napoleon’s existence. Nor can the existence of something that actually existed be denied just because there is no record of it. Denying the existence itself is denying history.
Physical changes in objects do not negate the existence of the objects themselves. The destruction of an object presupposes its existence. Even if individual objects are destroyed or altered, it pertains to the representations or attributes of the object, such as its form or nature, and does not affect the existence or essence of the object. Science presupposes the universality of such existence of objects. If the laws of nature temporarily stopped or changed when specific individuals or groups were in distress, science would lose its theoretical basis. Therefore, Buddha fell ill, Christ went to the cross calmly, Confucius did not speak of strange gods and demons, and Muhammad forbade idolatry. Buddha, Confucius, Christ, and Muhammad believed in the same thing. However, what their disciples believed was different. Did Buddha teach conflict? Did Confucius spread delusions? Did Christ give hatred? Did Muhammad believe in superstition? And what science presupposes is the same as what they believed, but what those who use or believe in science presuppose is different.
Destruction and change presuppose the existence of the object and only become meaningful when the object has meaning. Saying that a cup was broken or a tree was burned has no meaning if there is no object corresponding to the words cup or tree. Moreover, whether an object is called a cup or a teacup is decided by the recognizer, not by the object. However, the existence of the object is an issue of the object itself, and there is no room for interference by the recognizer. Even without names or meanings like cup or teacup, the object itself exists. Even if the object is meaningless or nameless, if its existence is acknowledged, it cannot be denied just because it has no meaning or name. The object exists as it is.
Changing the label on a bottle does not change its contents. It is unreasonable to deny the existence of a person just because one does not know their name. Similarly, no matter how much one thinks something should not exist, should not be, or cannot be, as long as the object exists, it exists. The existence of the object is not influenced by the self’s intentions, convenience, or concepts. Definitions of words arise from the necessity of the self. Therefore, meanings are diverse, but what they signify is one. Meaning cannot constrain the object, while meaning is always constrained by the object. Investigating the existence of the object is an issue for the self, not for the object. Objects are inherently nameless existences.
Such objects are naturally absolute existences. There are no incomplete or relative objects. Incompleteness or relativity arises inevitably in the process of recognizing and identifying objects. The existence of objects is self-evident. Incompleteness or relativity is a concept arising from the relationships between individual objects. It arises from the necessity of knowing the relationships between objects. And these are made concerning the attributes of the object, not its existence. In other words, what is relative are the attributes of the object, and the existence of the object is absolute at that point. Meaning is an abstraction of the object based on the necessity of the self, so meaning is always incomplete and relative to the object. However, the object is always complete and absolute. What is incomplete and relative are the attributes of the object and the recognition of the self.
What is impure is the concept of the self. It is the self that feels something is dirty, unclean, or ugly, not the object itself. There is no distinction between noble and base parts of the human body, and there are no grades of superiority or inferiority among living beings. It is oneself who feels that way and decides that way. The values represented by self-righteousness are systems constructed on the incomplete and relative recognition of the self, and inevitably, the values of the self become incomplete and relative systems. Moreover, society is built on the incomplete and relative concepts of humans, and it is also a place of conflict for the incomplete and relative self-righteousness. Therefore, the values of the self are extremely unstable systems, shaken from within and by external circumstances. People are selfish and weak-hearted, and this world is a battlefield. Unknowingly, people despise, mock, and scorn others. Others’ glory becomes envy, and others’ failures appear as opportunities. It is despicable. Discrimination is inherent in human society, regardless of the degree or extent. Disorder in the world is constant. Envy and jealousy are human nature. Obsession turns love into hatred and burns loved ones with the flames of karma. Resentment turns the heart into a demon and destroys oneself. Pleasure is a poison to the heart. To satisfy one’s desires, one may even sacrifice loved ones. What should be feared is human thought. Fear drives people mad, and delusions possess people and disrupt the world. The seeds of conflict never cease in the world. The standards for feeling something is dirty, unclean, or ugly vary among individuals, and this individual difference leads people to unknowingly discriminate against others and hurt each other. However, the purity of the object and the self remains unchanged. This purity of the object and the self maintains the purity of the self’s consciousness even in an imperfect society and sublimates the self’s values into a more complete system. And what exists behind the object is God, and what supports the self’s values is self-love. Therefore, a philosophy that denies faith in God, cannot establish the self, or cannot establish autonomous love is a barren and hollow philosophy. Everyone should have their own God in their heart. Otherwise, it is impossible to maintain peace of mind in the ever-changing world.
Meaning is a symbolization of individual objects. Since meaning is given to originally meaningless objects, meaning is incomplete and relative from the moment it is derived. If meaning is incomplete and relative, the recognition of the existence of the object must be direct. Recognition of the existence of the object cannot be done if one is caught up in the meaning of words. The existence of the object is not something to be understood but something to be acknowledged first. To clarify the relationship between the self and the object, and between objects, and to give meaning to the object and share that meaning collectively, the existence of the object must be acknowledged first. The means to recognize the object without relying on meaning is for each person to directly recognize the object, that is, through intuition. And the exchange of intentions must be based on the recognition of the existence of the object by each person. In other words, it is based on mutual understanding of the existence and recognition of the object. And both understanding of existence and recognition are based on each person’s recognition of existence. Therefore, whether recognizing the existence of the object directly from the object or through understanding and recognition, it must be done through intuition. In other words, the object is inherently meaningless, undefined, and a direct existence.
When people gossip about someone, they naturally presuppose that person’s existence. Even if they do not know the person directly, the conversation itself cannot be established unless they confirm or understand the person’s existence through some mediation or means. A person who does not even acknowledge the existence of that person cannot gossip about them. In other words, one cannot gossip about something that does not exist. If one could, it would be a mystery. Of course, whether that person actually exists or not is a separate issue. Whether one acknowledges or knows the existence of that person does not directly relate to the existence of that person itself. No matter how much I claim that I do not acknowledge the existence of someone I do not know, or that someone I do not acknowledge does not exist, I cannot erase the existence of someone who actually exists. Whether I deny or affirm the existence of that person in my consciousness does not affect their existence. It just means that the person I do not acknowledge has no meaning to me. For the other person to have some meaning to me, I must first acknowledge their existence, and for friends to gossip about that person, they must first mutually acknowledge that person’s existence.
People cannot know everyone in this world. The number of people one can meet in a lifetime is limited. Even close relationships can be forgotten if there is no contact for a long time. People can only know a very limited number of people. Meanwhile, people are still being born and continue to increase. Thus, while objects are limitless, the power of the self is limited. Therefore, one should not be greedy; those with limits cannot control the infinite. Humans cannot even control their own bodies.
Objects are infinite, and the power of the self is limited. Therefore, the self must divide the totality of objects into individual parts and limit the objects within the divided system to find the relationship between the object and the self, clarify the movement of the object and the self, and position the object and the self. However, when objects are divided, they lose their essence. This is why the recognition of objects by the self is inevitably incomplete and relative. The reason for discrimination in human society is the limitation of human cognitive ability, and the reason for the distinction between right and wrong, good and evil, beauty and ugliness, and preferences in humans is the same. When looking at the essence of things, one must first acknowledge the existence of the thing itself without prejudice. Otherwise, we will not be able to understand the true meaning of what we have judged.
The initial recognition of the object must be done through intuition. As long as it is done through preconceived notions or prejudices, the essence of the object cannot be acknowledged. However, the meaning of the object cannot be understood without the values of the self. And the values of the self are formed by preconceived notions and prejudices. Here lies a significant contradiction, and unless this contradiction is correctly understood, humanity cannot resolve the contradictions lurking within itself. To resolve this contradiction, one must first begin by vaguely acknowledging the object. One must confirm the fact of existence without immediately deciding it is so. Even if it is something unbelievable like supernatural powers or paranormal phenomena, if it is confirmed as a fact, one must acknowledge that fact. And the meaning of the phenomenon or fact is considered after acknowledging its existence. If one directly experiences it and acknowledges it as a fact, the opinions and beliefs of third parties are secondary issues. What is important is the fact. “I certainly saw it.”
Even if it is something unbelievable to a third party, intuition in object recognition refers to the direct recognition between the object and the self, and the understanding of recognition with a third party is secondary. In other words, “Hey, did you see that just now?”
This direct recognition between the self and the object is called innate intuition. Science is based on this innate intuition. Scientific questions arise in the process of identifying the object after first accepting it unconditionally. Scientific recognition is the attitude of recognizing what one perceives or experiences straightforwardly and honestly before judging whether to believe it or not, and then making judgments, including whether to believe it or not. It is essential to accept facts as facts without affirming or denying them from the outset. The scientific attitude is to determine the meaning of the object after that.
The self cannot control the principle behind the existence of the absolute object. Control, that is, what the self can do at will, pertains to the products of the self’s concepts, such as meaning, or the representations of the object, such as physical properties and forms, and the self cannot possess the principle that controls the existence of the object. Humans cannot even control their own bodies. The self cannot possess the existence of an object it cannot control. What the self can truly possess is only its own body, and even that body is a given that cannot be chosen, and must be returned to heaven upon death, so strictly speaking, the self cannot even possess its own body. The concepts of control and possession are valid only in the world of human concepts, and objects are governed by their own laws. Whether to control the object or not is an issue of the self’s consciousness, and the object is always an existence independent of the self. The concepts of control and possession are not principles that exist in nature but are created and agreed upon by humans according to their needs. Therefore, they cannot be discussed on the same level as the laws of nature; their necessity must be correctly understood, logically defined, and systematized within society. One cannot control the hearts of people with violence. One cannot regulate love with laws. One cannot possess youth. Therefore, knowing the principles of heaven and exhausting human wisdom is the true purpose of science.
Humans cannot even control their own fate. Even if one does not want to get sick or grow old, one will get sick when the time comes and die when the time comes. And as the years pass, one will age. Even if one throws a tantrum saying they hate themselves and want to stop being human, unless they are reborn, they are themselves and cannot stop being human. Even if one could be reborn, it does not mean things will go as one wishes. People are bound by their destiny. Humans can only be happy by properly utilizing what heaven has given them. Understanding the principles of heaven and the laws of nature, and having the mental capacity to enjoy the time, body, and abilities given to oneself, that is, one’s life, means that happiness is already given. Sleeping on half a tatami mat and lying on one tatami mat, with heaven as the roof and the earth as the bed. Great desire turns into no desire, and no desire fulfills great desire. Enjoying the eternal time, loving the changes of the four seasons, and playing in the infinite space. Peace of mind makes the world peaceful, and the Asura dwelling in the heart confuses the world. Life is also a dream, and by opening the eyes of the heart and accepting everything as it is, one reaches a state of living freely in heaven and earth. What worries or dissatisfaction could there be in this world? Between heaven and earth, between life and death, there is my life. Both joy and sorrow, pleasure and pain are within it. Carry the demon when meeting a demon. Carry the devil when meeting a devil, and carry karma when meeting karma. Meet Buddha in hell. See the light of God in the dark night. Do not consider suffering as suffering. Use adversity as nourishment. Be grateful for everything that keeps oneself alive. If one has no desires, everything in this world is in one’s grasp, and if one is greedy, one loses everything. Be like grass. When alive, firmly root in the earth and enjoy the sunlight, and after death, become humus for the world. Do not fear being nameless, just pray for the prosperity of human society. Decay and perish, just go where one’s will leads. Just as the self cannot control the existence of the object, no existence can deny the will of the self. What humans can control is only their own will, and that is enough.
Meaning is a symbolization of the object, and representation is merely a form of concept. Both meaning and representation are merely results of recognition. Objects only become phenomena when meaning is given or represented. Therefore, phenomena are also merely results of recognition. If the cause always precedes the result, the cause can constrain the result, but the result cannot constrain the cause. Therefore, meaning, concept, representation, and cause, which are results of recognition, cannot constrain the object, which is the premise of recognition. Scientific laws are constrained by objects, but objects are not constrained by scientific laws. The meanings, concepts, representations, and phenomena derived from the results of the self’s recognition of objects are all relative.
Humans cannot control nature. It is the same as humans not being able to control God. Science and technology aim to understand the laws of nature, utilize them, and draw out the power of nature to enjoy its benefits, based on this premise. Humans cannot create anything by ignoring the laws of nature. To say that humans are destroying nature is an arrogant idea. Nature has existed according to its laws long before humans appeared on earth. Scientific laws and natural laws are different. Scientific laws are incomplete systems, while natural laws are complete systems in themselves. Scientific laws are constrained by natural laws, but natural laws are independent of scientific laws. What is called environmental destruction is merely the result of human misunderstanding of nature, disrupting its harmony and creating an environment unsuitable for human habitation. It is self-inflicted. Since it is done in the name of natural science, it is even more problematic. However, no matter how unsuitable the environment is for human habitation, nature is nature and exists according to its laws. No one would think that outer space or the ocean is unnatural just because they are unsuitable for human habitation. Even if the earth becomes unsuitable for human habitation due to human actions, it is still nature. Science and technology cannot exist by opposing or ignoring the laws of nature. The essence of science is to derive and apply the necessary technologies for humans based on a correct understanding of the laws of nature.
Many religions have been used as tools to control people in the name of God, and at that time, God judged the rulers by His law. Similarly, if humans try to use science as a tool to control nature in the name of nature, nature will take revenge on humanity according to its laws. At that time, humanity will perish. Science must be
Objective reality and subjective existence each form independent worlds. The world of objective reality and the world of subjective existence are connected through the medium of the body. The self interacts with the external world through its body, reflecting external objects into its internal world. Additionally, the self expresses itself to the external world through the body. Humans actualize themselves through self-expression, and this actualized self is called an individual. The world of objective reality and the world of subjective existence are independent worlds and cannot be discussed on the same dimension. The inner world of the self and the external world are entirely different dimensions. The inner world and the external world are unified through the body of the self. The desires of the self and the conditions of the external world do not always align. The body of the self bears both the desires of the self and the conditions of the external world. Therefore, the self strives to align its desires with external conditions.
The structure of the self and the body are different. The structure of the self describes the sensory effects and functions on thought structurally. In contrast, the body refers to the organs that cause these effects and functions. For example, the organs that cause the sensation of pain are called the body, and the structure of thought composed of the sensation of pain is called the structure of the self. Therefore, while the body of an object other than the self can be perceived from its appearance, the structure of the self cannot be perceived.
No machine can start without someone to operate it. Similarly, the body is just a corpse without the master called life. Life cannot embody the self without the medium of the body. Whether the afterlife exists or not is a separate issue, but we must always presuppose the existence of such life. The mechanical part of human existence is called the body, and the factors that move the body, including the surface structure, are called the structure of thought or the structure of the self.
The world of objective reality and the world of subjective existence cannot be discussed on the same dimension. Previous monism confused these two into one theory, while dualism lacked something to connect the dimensions. The world of objective reality and the world of subjective existence are independent worlds that do not directly interfere with each other but are inseparably connected through the body of the self. Therefore, the world of objective reality and the world of subjective existence always learn the danger of confusion.
Since the self has only one body, the relationship between the self and the object is always one-to-one. Rather than one-to-one correspondence, the self and the object are unified into one through the body. The effects from the external world on the self are unified in a certain direction by the body. Similarly, when the self acts on the external world, it is unified in a certain direction by the body. Moreover, such actions always have an equal and opposite reaction. This reaction is called a counteraction.
Without understanding this relationship between the self and the object, one tends to lose sight of the true motives and purposes of one’s actions and the causes of incorrect recognition of the object.
For example, relationships between people are inherently one-to-one. Even when speaking to multiple people, one is either addressing a specific person within the group or addressing their collective will as one. In this way, the self grasps the object and, based on that object, infers what exists behind it. The relationship between the self and the object is always one-to-one, which is an important issue when considering human activities.
Since the relationship between the self and the object is one-to-one, the self feels anxiety towards objects outside its field of vision. This anxiety causes jealousy, suspicion, and a desire for exclusivity. Human cognitive ability is like a flashlight in the dark, only able to see the part illuminated within its field of vision. Humans always feel a certain fear towards sounds coming from the darkness outside their field of vision. This fear also becomes a source of strong desire and passion for the object.
Many people mistakenly believe that the development of information agencies in recent years has enhanced human cognitive abilities. However, while the development of information agencies can broaden the range of human cognition, it does not enhance cognitive abilities. Rather, it tends to weaken them. Humans find it difficult to believe in things outside their cognitive range. Even if given information beyond their cognitive limits, humans cannot handle it. When given more information than they can handle, their cognitive abilities decline, causing them to lose desire and passion for the object. Simply giving knowledge to people at an age where cognitive abilities are undeveloped means they only know the knowledge without understanding or utilizing its content. An excess of information leads to thoughtless or deviant behavior, which is extremely dangerous. No matter how much knowledge one has about animals, it does not mean one can raise them. The most important thing in raising animals is love for them and the desire to understand them. That alone is sufficient. Life is a process of growth. Those who consider it already complete are arrogant.
We know that there are worlds we do not understand. We know that we cannot know everything. We also know that we live in a limited world. We know that there is a world that only we can understand. Isn’t that enough? Whether it is conceptual or experiential, whether it exists or not, is not essential. What matters is how we position it.
The one-to-one correspondence between the self and the object causes issues of right and wrong. Since the self has only one body, it must unify its response to the object. However, we must remember that right and wrong are issues of the self, not the object. There is no need to unify the right and wrong of oneself and others. There is no reason why everyone must like the same woman. Equality does not mean everyone wears the same clothes and eats the same food. Right and wrong, good and evil, preferences are issues decided by oneself, and as long as they do not cause significant harm to others, it is nobody’s business what one likes.
Humans constantly feel anxiety towards inexplicable matters and strive to explain the objects they perceive. This is due to the compulsion from the fear and pressure of being targeted by something unknown from the darkness or being constantly watched by someone. This anxiety stems from the limits of human cognitive abilities. Moreover, what we can recognize is limited to what is within our field of vision at any given time.
The self cannot actualize without the medium of the body, and the self cannot be a direct object of recognition for itself. As long as the relationship between the self and the object is one-to-two, the self cannot be a third party. The self knows it exists, but it cannot directly perceive it. Humans always feel a sense of insecurity towards such a self.
Humans live surrounded by invisible uncertainties. Moreover, these uncertainties significantly impact their lives. Therefore, humans want to make these uncertainties visible. This is the desire for manifestation.
Some people consider human relationships from a utilitarian perspective. However, human actions always involve action and reaction, and considering human interactions based on profit and loss is meaningless. Giving is receiving, and teaching is learning. Focusing only on the visible parts of human interactions makes one feel used or using others. However, this overlooks the deep structure of human relationships, which is trust and affection. Those who do not know trust and affection must learn to flatter. Otherwise, they cannot understand human relationships. No system or society can exist without trust and affection.
Humans heavily depend on invisible relationships. This applies to nature, society, women, men, children, parents, siblings, and oneself. It is because they believe in these relationships that they are saved. If humans cannot believe in anything, they cannot live. Anger towards friends is not due to their actions but because they do not trust oneself. Anger towards a partner is not due to their actions but because one feels betrayed by them. Jealousy arises from the fear that the trust in oneself will shift to others. However, one must not forget that such anger and jealousy towards others are also anger towards oneself for not being able to fully trust them. What matters is the effort to trust others and the spirit to respond to their trust.
The desire to manifest invisible relationships led to the creation of the form of marriage and the establishment of systems. However, one must be careful with manifestation. There is a possibility of imposing one’s world on the world of the object. In one’s world, the self is the center. However, this is within one’s world and unrelated to the world of the object. Trying to manifest self-centered systems or thoughts inevitably causes strain and conflict.
Knowing the relationship between the self and the object means understanding the human condition. The self’s recognition of objects develops conically around the self. The recognition of the meaning of objects is selective because the self has only one body. This attitude is often seen in social systems and ideologies. This means bringing the self’s world into the world of the object, which is a reversal of the self and the object. Preventing such a reversal requires human progressiveness and confidence.
To prevent bringing the self’s world into the world of the object, one must position the actualized self, the individual, within the object. One must abandon the idea of “for oneself” and seriously consider “for oneself.” When walking alone on a country road at night, fear and terror make it difficult to keep one’s eyes open. However, overcoming that fear and terror allows the night’s cold air to make one feel the warmth of their body, revealing a beautiful world that cannot be seen in the daylight. For those who only look at their feet while walking, the landscape of any land looks the same. However, when one suddenly looks into the distance, even familiar landscapes can feel fresh and beautiful. Ultimately, what causes one to misjudge the object is one’s weakness. Fearing suffering, fearing the dark, and being preoccupied with one’s feet causes one to lose clear vision and the true appearance of the object. Only by feeling and believing in one’s current life can one see the true appearance of the object.
Ultimately, what I cherish is decisiveness. What makes humans strong is resolute determination. Fearing death makes one forget that they are alive. Recognizing the fact of death allows one to recognize the fact of life. Facts are not to be feared but revered. Humans recognize facts through actions and experiences. A moment of hesitation or doubt leads to incorrect decisions and judgments. Without decisiveness and judgment, one creates causes for lingering attachment and obsession. It is better to regret actions taken than to regret inaction. Through experience and action, we refine our recognition. Therefore, humans grow through decisiveness.
Decisiveness requires courage. Without decisiveness, one cannot make considerations about the object. When facing a situation, one must give their all and leave no regrets by giving their all. Fear of the outcome prevents action. Without reverence for the outcome, one cannot acknowledge their mistakes. Fear is the fear before knowing, and reverence is the fear after knowing. One can question the correctness of a plan because there is a premise of doing it. One should always face the object with a brisk attitude. If one wants to be saved, they cannot protect only themselves. The attitude of throwing oneself into the object is the way to save oneself. Only then can humans make decisions.
Recently, I have been disillusioned with students. It is not about each individual. Rather, if I name each one, they are all likable. However, being nice can be bad depending on the time and situation. What I am fed up with is the people who are complacent in their status as students. They talk big but think only of self-preservation when it comes down to it, lacking the spirit to break free from their parents’ protection. They lack the courage to trust others but have the cunning to consider human relationships from a utilitarian perspective. They do not get angry when despised for being lethargic, do not rebel when scolded for being indifferent, and do not feel ashamed when insulted for being uneducated. They criticize others but cling to their little authority. They are indecisive when they need to make decisions and miss opportunities. Lacking the resolve to take responsibility, they shift the blame to others when the outcome is bad and struggle to justify their actions. Even among activists, I have never heard a creative or constructive opinion from them. Those who aspire to learn should always cultivate a spirit of initiative and find joy in pioneering new frontiers. They should not follow what contradicts their aspirations.
What humans can truly possess are invisible things. Therefore, in a material sense, there are no actions in human behavior that result in gain or loss. There are only pure actions. When these actions are reflected in one’s world, one’s possessions are created for the first time. Therefore, one must express oneself in each action and find oneself. When one thinks of possessing the object, one loses both the object and oneself. One must not overlook the truth in each action. Therefore, each judgment and decision is important.
We tend to think that we reach a conclusion by accumulating logic step by step, but in reality, a certain judgment or decision is the initial premise. Indeed, looking at the result, it feels like the conclusion was derived according to a neat logical procedure, but that is the result, not the process. Creating new theories involves judgment and decision. If contradictions arise in the process of proving that judgment or decision, the judgment or decision is denied, and if the same conclusion is reached without contradiction, that conclusion is adopted. It is reasonable to think that the logical procedure was organized in the process of connecting the problem and the conclusion. And I believe that the initial judgment or decision is never logical but intuitive. However, humans do not leave intuition as it is but make intuitive judgments and decisions more certain through logic and expand their range of application. Both science and philosophy have intuition at their core, which includes judgment and decisiveness. And they always require the courage to correct mistakes.
In emergencies, the desire to be saved causes one to lose composure and lowers their usual judgment. Rather, if one prepares for the worst and feels like sacrificing oneself for their judgment, they become calm and can save themselves. When facing a situation, thinking about oneself makes one feel uneasy and shrink. Moreover, selfishness and self-centeredness deprive humans of energy and endurance in critical moments. I have heard that the biggest cause of death for those lost in forests is fear. Only the single-minded belief in oneself and the determination to stake one’s life on one’s judgment can save oneself. Strong responsibility and love for others give humans energy and endurance. Such responsibility and love are nurtured by daily decisions, regular mindfulness, training, and preparedness. The determination to invest all of oneself in each moment gives humans clear vision. When parents try to protect their children, they overcome their fear of the object and exert more power than usual. What makes humans live is love for others. Those who can only think of themselves cannot even protect themselves and cloud their vision of the object.
I think it is inappropriate to argue about chastity and pleasure. Chastity is not something to demand from others but from oneself. What matters is the truth in one’s feelings at each moment. At most, one should enjoy life at each moment. It is not about the past or the future. Of course, humans cannot compartmentalize their feelings, liking this person up to this point and that person from there. Without consideration for the other person, merely seeking an outlet for one’s desires leads to the loss of one’s human emotions. If one truly likes the other person, they strive to respond to their trust. Have you ever thought about how heartless it is to preach purity? How many people have been hurt and suffered because of that word? Love is the spirit of forgiving the other person and connecting with them beyond oneself. It is not about imposing one’s weakness on the other person. What I like is the person in front of me now, and that is the truth. It is neither the past nor the future of that person. If one can believe in the sincerity of the person now, what is there to worry about? It is also about differentiating between the issues of the self and the object, knowing the problems one must handle.
Logical procedures do not lead straight to conclusions. It is rare for only one conclusion to emerge. There are many ways and means. Without a certain judgment or decision as a premise, we cannot measure conclusions. Purposes change according to the person and the time. Therefore, one should think about the purpose at each moment. Moreover, humans cannot separate from their perspective. Therefore, it is difficult for many people to unify and share a purpose. Instead of trying to unify purposes, one should connect at their points of contact. In other words, seek the minimum line, not the maximum line. Because it is the minimum line, compromise is not allowed. The universality of the self exists only within the self at each moment. And when we feel the universality of the self at each moment, we can know eternal life.
Artistic expression is not done through reasoning from the beginning. The positioning and meaning of parts are determined after expression. Have you ever thought about why you love someone without ever having loved someone? Have you ever thought about why you are sad without ever being sad? We do not love people through reasoning. Nor do we grieve through reasoning. We love people, and reasoning arises to explain that fact. Moreover, explanations can convey that such a fact exists but cannot convey the fact itself. Accepting love as knowledge is pointless. Knowing it does nothing. It is just empty. Saying complicated things is not genuine. What moves people’s hearts is genuine. What matters is not knowing how to love but actually loving someone. Facts exist in each moment. Art is expressed to fixate the universality in each moment. In that moment’s universality, we find beauty, goodness, and truth.
Without decisiveness, one harbors resentment and becomes discouraged. This is because one cannot prove their correctness. Why give up before trying? Why lose before fighting? Action is the accumulation of decisions. What matters in accurately recognizing the object is honesty and straightforwardness. Lack of decisiveness and judgment ultimately distorts recognition of the object. Without decisiveness, one cannot even fall in love with a person.
Hedonism and asceticism ultimately lead to the same place. Whether one is faithless or faithful, the lifestyle of those who are thorough in it is the same. Today’s good may become tomorrow’s evil. However, fearing that tomorrow’s evil will prevent one from doing today’s good is cowardly. Why worry about tomorrow? If one gives their all today, tomorrow will come on its own. Why not strive to turn today’s suffering into joy while dreaming of tomorrow’s pleasure? If one cannot believe in today, how can they believe in tomorrow? If one does not live today, how can they live tomorrow? Live in the moment, die in the moment. One must not forget that they are themselves. One can be honest with the object because they are honest with themselves at that moment. Why would a person who is true to their beliefs fear the afterlife? Why curse or pray to God? In a moment of decision and judgment, there is only truth and one’s life. There is no God or Buddha.
There may be those who die without making decisions, but there are no those who die by their own hands while they can make decisions. Even in the case of seppuku, one chooses death because they cannot prove their goodness. Everything is learning. Learning begins by clarifying the right and wrong of oneself at that time. Being honest with the object is being honest with oneself. Recognizing one’s faults and being tolerant of others is because one is true to oneself at that time. When we are true to ourselves at that time, we can cut off lingering attachments and clear doubts about ourselves and the object. At that time, we can see a clear world before us.
Humans are not foolish. They do not think they can maintain themselves without knowing
Modern civilization is a civilization of daylight. It denies all darkness and insists on exposing everything in this world to the light of day. Indeed, modern science developed by shedding light on the darkness of the Middle Ages. However, it is also true that environmental destruction and the development of apocalyptic weapons have progressed simultaneously. Clarifying the fundamentals of things and seeking the truth is correct. However, we must not forget that if it goes too far, it will desertify culture. Denying all existence of darkness and destroying the mysterious means denying all unknown worlds to humanity from the outset. However, the mysteries of life, the enigmas of the universe, the laws of nature, the world of emotions, and the unknown world of humans are still infinitely vast and deep.
Emptiness, darkness, and silence stimulate human imagination and curiosity. And creativity is nurtured by imagination.
People mock the heavens when they are happy and curse the heavens when they are unhappy. How selfish. However, the heavens are the heavens. They cannot be swayed by human convenience. Originally, the heavens are an existence unrelated to human intentions.
The divine providence works in all the existences of this world. God does not exist solely for humanity. God exists for dogs and cats, for plants and rocks. Even if humanity perishes, God will not perish. This is because God has existed long before humanity was born. Just as the laws of nature are not swayed by the fate of a single human, divine providence is not influenced by human intentions or convenience.
All living things are equal before death. Is there anything that lives that does not perish? No matter how much one fears death or wishes not to die, death will inevitably come to those who have once received life in this world. This is an unavoidable reality. Death comes to all impartially, fairly, and equally.
This is divine providence. When faced with death, humans have no choice but to be true to their way of life. This is because no excuses, authority, power, or favoritism are valid before death. No sage or ruler can escape the reality of death. Humans cannot overcome death unless they face themselves and see their true nature. And thinking about death is also thinking about life. And it is also about looking at God behind it.
It seems that humanity has somehow grasped a power that can influence its fate, like God. However, humanity does not know how to control that power. Humanity cannot become God. Nor can it transcend God. Therefore, if humanity cannot control the power it has gained through the development of science and technology, it will face the crisis of extinction. To control that power and survive, humanity needs to reconsider God once again.
It is divine providence that a person’s life returns to nothingness through death. However, if humanity perishes due to war or environmental destruction, it is merely human karma. Thinking about human life through death is exploring divine providence, but worrying about the extinction of humanity and thinking about human existence only makes us realize our own foolishness.
What can we promise our children? Nothing. If we can only leave our children with the fear of human extinction and the cost of environmental pollution, it is a cruel story. What gives people dreams is the curiosity for the unknown world and the longing for a noble spirit. Taking away the future from children is taking away their hope. However, modern people have become baku that devour children’s dreams. As a result, the world that spreads before children’s eyes is a void that does not allow imagination. Can we still tell children to have hope? And humanity is trying to build a second Tower of Babel on the devastated land. If humanity perishes, will people curse God at that time? Foolish, what should be cursed is our own foolishness. Once again, accepting God’s love and leaving a creative world where children can have hope is a significant responsibility imposed on modern people.
Those who deny God make themselves God. Those who make themselves God perish by their own power. When humanity accepts God’s love honestly, it can achieve true glory.
God is the existence that makes existence exist. And God guarantees the existence of the self, and the existence of the self proves the existence of God. Therefore, God is existence itself and a purely conceptual existence. And the existence of God is absolute, and the absoluteness of the self is guaranteed by God.
God has no attributes. Therefore, God is perfect and everything. God is great, absolute, spiritual, and pure. Therefore, God is a timeless, universal existence that transcends space and time.
Just because one gets injured or sick does not mean their existence is denied. Even if the body perishes, the existence of the self cannot be denied. Humans live until the moment of death, and as long as they are alive, they are alive. Naturally. Moreover, even if one dies, the fact that they lived, that is, the existence of the self, cannot be denied. Furthermore, since we do not know what happens to the self after death, the existence of the self cannot be denied by death. The existence of the self exists as long as the self continues to exist, and existence itself is not influenced by external changes. Similarly, God exists as long as this world exists. God is an immutable existence, and external changes are not the essence of God. External changes act positively as a function of time, and existence acts negatively. Therefore, existence is immutable, and God, who makes existence exist, is immutable.
God, a purely conceptual existence, is a latent, that is, a negative existence. Such a latent existence of God cannot be directly perceived. Humans are unreliable beings, so it is difficult to believe in objects that cannot be directly perceived. Therefore, they desire to manifest God. I do not intend to deny that human weakness and desire. To manifest God, God must be symbolized. However, since God has no attributes and is a perfect existence, it is essentially impossible to symbolize God with imperfect and transient objects. Therefore, while I do not necessarily deny the worship of idols, which are manifestations of God, humans, being inherently unreliable, must correctly understand the original meaning of idols and be careful not to be captivated by them. This is because idols are merely goals or markers of faith.
Originally, God has no attributes. Therefore, faith in God must always be directed solely at God itself. Whether it is the Bible, saints, clergy, or religious organizations, no matter how noble they are, and even if it is permissible to respect them, it is not permissible to make secular authority the object of faith. That is nothing but blasphemy against God. Faith in God is established solely by the one-to-one relationship between God and the self, and nothing can intervene in that relationship. Therefore, faith in God cannot be forced upon people, nor can it be done. After all, God exists regardless of whether people believe in God or not, and faith in God is merely for humans to be saved. God is pure, and God’s purity demands pure faith from people. Therefore, the freedom of faith is included in the original meaning of faith and is an inherent right for humans.
God always points to the truth universally. And God always reveals and gives everything. God’s love is poured into all existences. Whether one knows that truth, accepts God’s gifts, and bathes in God’s love is a matter of individual will. God is a transcendent being. God is an existence that transcends the self. Whether one believes in God or not is a personal matter, but the existence of God is God’s own matter. God exists whether one believes in God or not. This is like not being able to deny the existence of a person just because one dislikes them. The existence of God is a matter that transcends the self, and the will of the self and the existence of God are issues of different dimensions.
Those who curse God curse themselves. This is because God is the existence that makes the self the self. Therefore, denying God is denying the existence of the self.
What is a miracle? A true miracle is when the natural happens naturally. It does not refer to mysterious things like mountains moving, seas parting, or the dead rising. It would be unbearable if the laws of nature changed daily or if human fate were swayed by God’s mood. Originally, God is an impassive existence, and therefore, God can be natural, just, fair, and equal. All living things perish, and every meeting has a time of parting. Everyone ages and grows old. The sun rises and sets. That is the order, and it is an unavoidable reality. Because that order is universal, people can live their daily lives with peace of mind. And God does not exist solely for specific species or individuals.
It is a matter of values. Modern people either disregard or deny faith, but is that progress? Is it truly scientific? Whether science becomes a gospel for humanity is a matter for humanity to decide from now on. God helps only those who save themselves. How one thinks about, interprets, and understands God is a human issue, and whatever the result, it is a problem humans must solve. The same applies to science.
The history of modern science seeks its starting point in the premise of the existence of objects. By presupposing the existence of objects, science was able to obtain objective grounds and analytical means. And this made it possible for the modern era to progress dramatically.
Modern times are also an era of revolution. The energy of creation and destruction required by revolution was brought about by scientific realism. Instead of the previous method of defining laws through mystical concepts, a new method was adopted to discover laws by perceiving objects as they are.
This seems to have originated from questioning the nature of faith brought about by the religious revolution. In other words, instead of defining the laws existing behind phenomena through mystical forces or the logic of a fantastical world, it is an attitude of seeking laws by considering only reality as the sole basis of certainty. This attitude is called scientific. It also means that the purpose of science is not only the salvation of the human soul but also the pursuit of material salvation.
Scientists tried to eliminate their subjectivity and base their work on objective data. Therefore, scientists always tried to be objective towards objects. However, scientists did not realize that trying to perceive reality as it is and being objective would result in bringing the rawness of reality into science. Material prosperity does not necessarily lead to the salvation of the soul. However, material prosperity has made people forget the salvation of the soul. Modern times are characterized by the prevalence of spiritual poverty amid material abundance.
The development of science has eliminated the reflection of events in the world of God on the world of humans, which used to control human fate. An attitude emerged to solve human affairs by separating them from the world of God and relying on their own power. Indeed, this became the driving force of the modern era. However, it was clearly an overreach that it extended to the denial of God.
Humans are humans. They are neither more nor less than that. Therefore, it is foolish to think of transcending God or degrading oneself to a being less than human. One should live as a human and seek happiness as a human. However, this does not mean denying God, losing reverence for God, or looking down on animals other than humans. Humans need faith to live as humans.
It started from what was thought to be unrelated to philosophical contemplation. Modern people discovered that more universal laws and truths were hidden behind phenomena and ways of thinking that were considered everyday and mundane. When light was shed on the truths hidden behind common phenomena and the human will buried in daily life from a completely different perspective, they began to shine differently.
Indeed, there are people of various births in this world. However, it is also true that people of different births look up at the same sky simultaneously. Indeed, there are people with various thoughts in this world. However, it is also true that they inhabit the same earth simultaneously. And this certainty is irreplaceable. Because of this certainty, people can live their daily lives with peace of mind. Do airplanes flying in the skies of countries with different systems fly by different principles? Do cars driven by people who believe in different gods operate by different laws? Even if the system of a country changes or people believe in different gods, the laws of nature do not change. This fact is nothing but a true miracle. Accepting the various phenomena that occur in this world as they are, without being caught up in preconceptions or prejudices, and clarifying the truth through patient observation and experimentation. This should have originally required clarifying the relationship between God and humans, and nature and humans. At the very least, scientists should have had the responsibility to make such efforts. However, modern people have neglected that effort.
Indeed, science has provided humans with a more human place and new spirit and technology, instead of relying on God’s miracles or Buddha’s mercy for the means of human salvation. However, it has also brought new suffering and guilt, such as the crisis of human extinction and environmental pollution. The earth does not belong solely to humanity. Recently, scientific eschatology has been rampant, replacing religious eschatology. People know that they cannot be saved by science. Therefore, while people insult God, they secretly expect miracles from God. However, how many modern people can seek salvation from God? First and foremost, believing in God comes first.
This seemingly chaotic way of perceiving objects in science has transformed the previous views of nature and life and led the modern era in a unified direction. This is one of the characteristics of the modern era. The tragedy of humanity is that this direction eventually led to the denial of God and faith. And the denial of God and faith created preconceptions and prejudices of a different quality than before, leading to the denial of humanity and the destruction of the natural environment. Human arrogance and conceit have caused environmental destruction on a global scale, endangering the very existence of humanity.
Can science truly save humanity? Why does the flame of nuclear power sometimes reflect human karma? Modern science, which once seemed invincible, appears to have stalled since the two world wars. I believe the cause lies in the purposelessness of science.
When scientists tried to perceive science as a self-contained entity, a tendency arose to consider the social responsibility of scientists as secondary. This also created a new faith in science, making it a secular authority replacing the former church, and in exchange for the protection of power, it played a role in supporting power from within the system, similar to the former state religion. In other words, scientists were allowed to do anything for the purpose of scientific inquiry, and as long as they received the endorsement of being scientific, they could be accepted anywhere, falling into the trap of scientific omnipotence. On the other hand, the transformations and contradictions in industries and political systems that arose incidentally from the development of science and technology were considered economic and political issues, and scientists avoided social responsibility under the pretext that they should not interfere. Just as clergy once avoided practical issues as secular problems, scientists turned a blind eye to real contradictions. Despite being revered in place of philosophers and clergy who had previously reigned as secular authorities, scientists were not questioned about their ethics. However, nuclear and biochemical weapons that could lead to human extinction were not created solely by the whims of politicians, and the ongoing severe environmental destruction is undeniably a byproduct of scientific development. This irresponsible system, where politicians and soldiers are held accountable but scientists are not, has expanded today’s crisis. Modern weapons would not have been developed without the cooperation of scientists.
Scientists believed they should not be involved in secular issues and withdrew into their laboratories, drawing out the great power of nature within their own world. Moreover, scientists inherited the temperament of engineers and craftsmen, and society prioritized research results, so there were few questions about the humanity of scientists. However, to make the next century a peaceful and constructive era, the ethics of scientists must be questioned.
Humanity should realize that the delusions of scientists are worse than those of dictators. Just as shamans once bewildered people’s minds in the name of God, many scientists are trying to achieve their ambitions in the name of science. Just as those who serve God fear God, scientists must not lose their reverence for nature. If those who serve God lose their fear of God, they will incur God’s wrath. Similarly, if scientists try to use nature solely for their ambitions, not only scientists but all humanity will face nature’s retribution. It is because we do not forget our reverence for God and nature that we can enjoy their blessings.
What is a human? What does it mean to live? And what is death?
I have heard that the way of life differs entirely between death row inmates and those sentenced to life imprisonment. It seems that whether humans are clearly aware of death or not changes their subsequent way of life. Considering it, nothing is as fair, just, and equal as death. And the afterlife is the greatest mystery for humans and a heavy issue in a person’s life.
How does science answer this question of death? And how does it explain life? Indeed, science has clarified the relationships between objects. However, science has not yet solved any of the mysteries related to human existence. Overreliance on science and disregarding human dignity could lead to denying human existence itself.
If the purpose of science is solely research and scientists are dominated by the idea that they only need to conduct research, science always risks falling into research for the sake of research, like solving puzzles. Research is merely a means, and if the means are mistaken for the purpose, science will lose its true purpose. If that happens, science will be driven to an unrealistic otherworld, and scientists will be confined to a transcendent world. Scientists must always reconsider the purpose of their research in relation to reality. Otherwise, science inherently risks unconsciously creating harmful things for humanity as a result.
Humanity is like setting landmines in its own room. There will be no victors in the next world war, only extinction. Ironically, modern science has brought both hope and despair to humanity. God always gives humanity good and evil, creation and destruction. However, which one to choose is left to humanity’s will. Development or extinction, that is a problem we must decide.
Scientists are selfish. They dislike being constrained more than anything. They want to research as their interests lead them. Their research requires enormous costs. Scientists first secure the freedom of research and simultaneously try to raise funds. The church’s repression of science in the Middle Ages further spurred the obstinate attitude of scientists, making them increasingly transcendent. Scientists feign indifference to politics and religion to secure the freedom of research. On the other hand, to raise funds, they become subservient to those in power. Moreover, ignorant scientists research as their curiosity leads them. The crimes committed by such scientists are serious.
This disorderly and immoral development of science has provided humanity with the extreme results of creation and destruction. The fact that apocalyptic weapons and pollution have spread in the shadow of scientific and technological development sharply questions the social responsibility and ethics of scientists. It is time for us to reconsider the purpose of science and the role of scientists.
Everyone thinks that humans will inevitably die someday. However, considering it, no living person has experienced death. The afterlife remains in the realm of fiction. Humans have always feared death and wished to be freed from darkness. Seeking salvation from God is because they cannot understand the afterlife, and the motivation to establish scientific means is the same. However, while science has brightened people’s lives materially, has it provided spiritual enlightenment? Why should those who live their best today fear the afterlife? Spiritual enlightenment must be lit within our hearts by our own power.
The twenty-first century belongs to children. When I am looked at by the clear eyes of children who speak to me innocently, I worry about whether I can truly promise them a happy era. Modern people are so concerned