A Stepping Stone?
If you want that a child learns to count to 10, you can start teaching it to count from 1 to 2.
Well done.
However, if the child is at the same time being led to believe that there is absolutely nothing after the 2, really nothing at all, because 2 is simply ‘the best of the best’, then the child will have the biggest trouble to get past the number 2, let’s say, on its way to number 3.
Good…
However, if you at the same time … you will run into the same problem again with 4.
And then we might arrive at 5, with quite a lot of effort.
And just maybe … we come to 6 … somewhere at the age of retirement … and …
And well. Actually we did not even want to teach the child to count to 10. We just wanted the child learning to count
… to infinity.
One often hears/reads: people need a ‘stepping stone’, on the way to deeper understanding. That ‘stepping stone’ is a belief in some kind of New-Age-y idea (or just really very Old-Age-y, does it matter?), something that pulls them out of the purely materialistic idea in which they might already have been a child for 30 or 40 years, on their way to insight in their own deeper possibilities.
That is possible.
But what I usually notice then is that people – as with our count above – just get stuck: at 2, at 3, at 4, … and then back to 2 or even to 1 …
All things considered I personally think that ‘stepping stones’ are not recommendable,
unless they are handed down in very great openness. But of course: then it would not be stepping stones anymore. Then it would be just the whole open thing from the start.
So show 1 and 2 and immediately show, even in advance, that it does not stop at 2, it always goes further.
By the way: also the 0 is important.
The 0 is very special. It is a starting point and an end. And you don’t have to do anything at all, for that 0. It goes entirely ‘spontaneously’ 😊.
Related Posts
The Whirlpool of Economics
“Good institutions create individual trust, which creates rich economies.” This is the short summary as given by some of 2024’s Economics Nobel Prize-winning insight, countering the contention that rich economies just create good institutions. As in the whole field of psychosomatic health, such linearities may be only part of excellent causal thinking. Reality is more Read the full article…
The Me-Syndrome
This is not egoism, although it may turn into that. The me-syndrome is about excessively being entrenched within oneself. The outside world becomes ‘the alien place.’ We are all more or less prone to this. You might recognize some of it within yourself. It’s almost natural — no badness involved. Yet in an increasingly complex Read the full article…
Distinction without Division
Distinctions help us see, but they do not need to divide what they reveal. In fact, coherence itself requires differentiation: an amorphous whole is not yet a coherent one. From Gestalt perception to the immune system and human society, deeper coherence can enable finer distinctions without fragmentation. Perhaps understanding grows when we become more able Read the full article…