I tried to think of a constant in my life, something that I know with 100 out of 100 certainty, something that is beyond doubt. Apart from the matters of the heart, such as my love for my daughters, which is a love that does not depend on anything, after half a century here, if there is something I know for sure, it is that I don't really know anything for sure. So many "truths" that I fought for have changed, turned out to be wrong, lost power over them. In general, this gap between the desire and stability, the fear of changes, compared to the constant change of everything and interest in the earth and the universe in general, is something that is not clear to me. If the world is essentially a change from the beginning, then why are we like this?
Regardless of what I chose to study and delve into, in the university of the sciences or the university of life, I approached the subject with a kind of innocence - that if I just finish my degree in psychology then I will understand my nature, that if I just invest and give my all to these and those friends then there is no reason for anything to happen between us bad. That's how I set out about six years ago to write my book What Happens on the Land of the Moon. For Tommy, I thought that if I just understood what it was like to exist in one-sixth the gravity of Earth, that would be enough. Well, it isn't. And the more I deepen my understanding of the minimal science required for me to write science fiction and not science fiction, the more waves of despair rise and every time I think I've managed to catch them with the writing surfboard, "Here comes another big wave"...
I am already so invested in the story and the characters that I have no choice but to continue telling their story. But as I told my husband recently, if I had known in November 2018 where I was entering, I would have chosen door number three. In general, our whole life is choices upon choices upon choices, isn't it? From the level of the color of the pen and which notebook, through the place where we chose to live, with whom we chose to come with us on the journey to which side we lean in matters of the hour. And yet, in the midst of all this, in a world that doesn't choose ammunition before firing it, my personal work is how to do it so that I can get better at clarifying my words for the better.
You probably don't know, but I do several proofreadings on the text you receive here from me every week. This is in addition to the editor's work and also after I sent the column for review. Sometimes these are minor spelling errors, but they don't bother me as much as the thought that this or that word might hurt someone. There is no certainty in this either, but there is control over knowing that I did my best to prevent this from happening. and opinions? They are a matter for discussion and the discussion can always be continued in the comments. On the contrary, discussion is something that violates and teaches. Unless he's righteous, then it's not a discussion and it's about trying to force feed someone who doesn't want to taste at all.
The meaning of it all, musings of a citizen scientist / Richard Feynman
On the science shelf in the library I found a non-scientific book, but written by a Nobel Prize winning scientist for physics. Thus, in my search for scientific material to help me write my book, I found someone who would conduct a discussion with me that occupies me just as much as science these days - life alongside war. In these challenging days in our Israel, when people are searching for meaning, it is no wonder that the inscription on the Book Avenue on the shelf of the regional library caught my eye: The meaning of all this, musings of a citizen scientist By: Richard Feynman.
In a series of lectures from 1963, another century, another thousand, even before we landed on the moon, the Nobel Prize winner's reflections on wars, politics, religion and life in general, shed light (or in his case: cast reasonable doubt) on our lives in the 21st century. Feynman does not pretend to know answers, but already emphasizes in the introduction that "I could say, what society looks like to a scientist, but in the end it's society as it looks to me." (p. 13).
And after reading and agreeing more or less, I can say (quite certain) that for me, the book is worth reading and it will be interesting to read it again in the future. Because he made me think, reflect, stop and come to the reality of our life which is not at all simple with searching eyes. Because sometimes I think that everything has already been said, all the stories have been told, all the actions have been done, all the conclusions have been drawn. Are we once again in a difficult period of fanaticism for our faith and only ours? Or as Feynman writes: "If you look back at the most difficult times, it seems that there were days when people believed in something with complete faith and fanaticism. They were so zealous that they insisted that the whole world must agree with them. And they did things that were completely contrary to their beliefs to show that what they said was right." (p. 39)
And me? Learning to welcome changes and... to doubt. I took this aside from Richard Feynman: "...Scientists are used to dealing with doubt and uncertainty. All scientific knowledge is uncertain. This recognition of doubt and uncertainty is extremely important. I believe it is of great importance, which goes beyond the realm of science. I believe that in order to solve any previously unsolved problem it is necessary to leave The door is open to the unknown. You must allow the possibility that you are not completely right, otherwise you may not solve the problem." (p. 32)
Stayed / released
Regarding the question remaining או loose, his book Del Feynman is returned to the library with an addition to the list of books I would like leave Or at least borrow it again from the library. This is the kind of book that instills thoughts and ideas in me and I like to examine after several years what I internalized and how the things said affect me from the distance of time.
Book details:
The Meaning of All This - Reflections of a Citizen Scientist, Richard Feynman, Publishing Books for Literature, 1999.
Pleasant reading and may good words be by your side always,
Lily
Important article Lily. Shabbat Shalom and blessed to you.
Thank you very much Rafi, you too.
I wish the politicians would occasionally consider the possibility that they are not right.
In our national politics the discussion is already trivial.
In local/metropolitan politics, in recent weeks some mayors have announced their ambition for the Carmel tunnels for free.
The same tunnels promoted by a mayor who, just like them, did not listen to his residents.
It might be worth lending the book to one of these populist mayors, assuming there is a (admittedly slim) chance that they will read it.
I don't know how to testify about this or that politician.
But in the context of this book, Richard Feynman refers at length to the subject of politics and claims that the problem lies in the expectations of the crowd, which does not want honest answers (just as a politician would say that he does not know something for sure, even if he has an explanation for it). In his opinion, due to the demands of the crowd, honesty will not get the politician far and at least as of 1963 he did not know anyone in politics who tried to tell the truth.
He explains and summarizes his thoughts with this: "The attitude of the masses is that the candidate should have a ready answer, and that a person who answers is better than one who does not answer, when in most cases, in fact, the opposite is true. And the result of this way of thinking is that the politician must respond. Therefore, he will never be able to fulfill what he promises. This is a fact. It's impossible. That is why no one believes the promises of the election campaign. And therefore there is disappointment with politics..." (page 65).
Thank you for your thoughts and have a good week 🙏🏼