At first, my favorite science exploration cartoon as a kid may have led me to believe that the brain was just but a walnut-shaped pink blob resting under my hair, behind my eyes, and between my ears.
I quickly realized it also had many lines and faults— though they didn’t seem to have any use. Just like the folds of the small intestine; they were pure design. I also discovered that this pinkish lump was very lumpy indeed, slimy. It had this slippery-soft layering—which explained why my head was so drained on hot summer days.
Fast-forward to the present, (or recent past to be precise) everything makes logical sense: the lump has various compartments, called lobes, the folds are called sulci, the mini-lumps are gyri, and the coat of slime is cerebrospinal fluid! It was that simple! Well, unfortunately, until now, there are many things about this lump I haven’t discovered yet. And the fact that I am still calling it a ‘lump’ can confirm that.
As well-versed thinkers, we can probably go on and on about how the brain weighs only 3.11 lbs yet uses a fifth of the body’s oxygen; and many other obvious facts. But can we also consider the unknown? Actually, can we talk about its faults?
For a start, the [human] brain is infinitely dense, like the universe. And since we blame it for our behaviors, let’s put it on trial:
Why do we think everything has to fall into the sorting box of “Yes” or “No”? For instance, you will likely hesitate to answer if I ask which side of a burning dilemma you stand. You will even stare away into the void, not because you think, but because you know. You know which side you favor. If it’s on the proposition, I will ask why you support it; whether it’s logical, ethical, moral…and whatnot. Then you’ll quickly move to opposition, to appease me. Then again I will ask why you’re now against it; whether it defies your identity, dignity, culture…and so on. But what’s the use?
You see, the fault I find in the set-up of these problems we create is that they tend to be limited in logic. Why only ‘yes’ or ‘no’? Haven’t we just agreed that the mind is infinite? We indeed should not limit ourselves to two groups, for in this we risk forming another; that of the ‘neutral fence-sitters’, the ‘unheard’, and all that fuss about not taking sides. So now we end up with two basic parties incompatible within themselves: the conformers, or ‘the decided’, versus the I-rather-not-say-anything-about-this. (Well, thanks a lot, it now becomes less controversial, doesn’t it?)
But there might be a solution. At the end of the day, everyone has to sit at the table and dine with the rest. So instead of only responding with a ‘yes’ or ‘no’, why don’t we add a third option; “I don’t know?” In this way, the third group of undecided people will not be swept under the carpet but sit at the table—literally—and not be left out.
And to think of it, sometimes we can’t know anything—we need a little more time or space. Sometimes we can’t tolerate some people, so we can say “I don’t know!” maybe to brush them off. But let’s not misuse it. It might be a great solution.
— Thank You!
Sources
I really agree with you. Sometimes it's hard to say yes, and saying no might never be the best option. It leaves you in a dilemma that you can't get out of. So I guess if one was given the option to say "I don't know", they would probably have gladly taken it since the others were just too much to discern.
Is 'both' an answer?
I definitely say 'I don't know' if I want to end the convo with someone I don't like! Love the philosophy of this btw, I'm trying to build a Sub about ADHD and another about alien/UFO impacts and philosophy on the world, so will take some inspiration on critical thinking from your content.