The problem of
change struck the first philosophers more than 25 centuries ago. How are we to understand how things come into being and then pass away
again? How can things change, how do
they change, and why? What are the
things that change? Do they remain the
same, or do they change as well? How are
we to understand qualitative and substantial change? And what about the people
who ask about the nature of change, do they remain the same throughout their
lives, or do they change as well? Can they change out of all recognition? Is there anything that remains the same while
everything else is changing?
One answer to
these questions is that only the principle of change itself does not
change. It takes awhile to see just how
deep this thought is. So many of our
cherished human dreams and wishes must be put aside if we are to accept as true
the thought that everything in time is subject to change, and this change
brings about the obliteration of all things in it.
We would
rather not think about these things. For
a start, if we accept the principle of change as real, then nothing is forever,
not even the fixed stars in the sky, the immemorial mountains or the timeless
sea. The trouble is that our lives are
so short that we do not see it. We need science to think of time scales that
are unimaginably vast. If every one of
your seconds was a billion years long, the big bang would be just a few seconds
ago.
The earth
will, in all probability, meet its end in fire when the sun expands in a few
billion years. The human species may
succeed in spreading throughout the universe, but if, as now seems likely, the
universe itself will suffer heat death and become as cold as the grave, then
however successful we are in surviving, there will be no surviving that. It is also possible that the very things that
have allowed humans to colonize the earth are the things that will kill
them. If the principle of change is
operating, then we humans, whatever else we are, are also an evolutionary
experiment, subject to change and eventual dissolution. There is simply no naturalistic way around
it.
No comments:
Post a Comment