Seek_Simplicity_and_Distrust_It

Topic "Seek simplicity, and distrust it" (Alfred North Whitehead) Is this always good advice for a knower' Word Count: 1209 Simplicity is the property, condition, or quality of being simple or un-combined. It often denotes beauty, purity or clarity. Simple things are usually easier to explain and understand than complicated ones. Simplicity can mean freedom from hardship, effort or confusion. It may also refer to a simple living lifestyle. Can also be the basis, or bare foundation to terms of understanding, proving no depth or intricate reasoning. In the definition above, one aspect of simplicity connotes, that more often than not, we tend to take simplicity as the solution because of the fact that simplicity doesn’t make us go through the travails of the uncomfortable journey of probe because it is difficult and tiring and most humans by nature seek pleasure and comfort while avoiding discomfort and arduous tasks. But because of this very proclivity, the real truth of the matter escapes us at that time and later might come up through the hard work of somebody else who explores tirelessly to arrive at the real truth. This justification is one aspect and the aspects themselves can be many, nuances can be many, parlances can be several which one way or the other point to validity of Whitehead’s dictum “Seek simplicity and distrust it”. I agree with the statement and acknowledge the same from the perspective of both a knower as well as a non-knower. The only difference is that the knower will know that adherence to this dictum will yield him or her better results even though he or she might not ultimately arrive at the result. On the other hand, a non-knower will probably not know and yet might get swindled in case of any type of transactions among humans or he might get to know after it is too late which might or might not transform him into a knower. The crux is that this dictum is certainly of huge importance and can be tested from different perspectives. Although, the point of views are too many and the length of my discussion is too lengthy, I will try to cover (what I feel is right but I myself might be wrong) the best possible aspects that will warrant Whitehead’s dictum since ‘The knowledge we value the most is the knowledge for which we can provide the strongest justifications.’ Looking at the dictum from one perspective, a man offering a smile on the face of it would probably seem as if an amiable person is ready to help or befriend you. Taking his smile on the face value would mean ascribing his facial expressions to simplicity and this simplicity could be taken as gullibility if the same man has some ulterior motives for befriending you. Later on, when you are duped by that person because of not discerning or distrusting that person at the outset, you question your decision of trusting that simplicity and acting credulously. We all know that a smile is a simple thing, it is something that instantly brings joy and trust, but a smile may harbor something else beneath it. Distrusting the smile based on who is passing that smile and what is the occasion besides judging all other facts of that situation well can bring us to an altogether different answer. It might take some while but distrusting the same and probing into the reason of it might reveal some other cause which might be actually detrimental. Looking at the same dictum from another perspective, we have seen the dictum to hold true not only in relationships or human behavior but also in the world of science, where seemingly simple theories are distrusted and then further disinterred to unveil that the earlier theory was wrong which is repudiated by the new theory. For example, for a long time, the earth was thought of being flat structured but now we know that earth and all other planets are round in shape and that Sun does not revolve around the earth but the earth like all other planets revolves around the sun. Also within Science, let us take up the study of an atom. In the quest for the smallest particle, many models were proposed and many theories were floated one after another refuting or challenging the earlier version. Rutherford refuted Thomson’s model and Rutherford’s own planetary model’s shortcoming were highlighted by the Quantum Theory propounded by Max Planck and Albert Einstein which was incorporated by Bohr into Bohr’s model of an atom. Therefore, for a layman, looking at the atom as the smallest particle is simple and is perfectly fine an explanation. This was also the view of many a scientists for a number of years. The structure of an atom might appear or might have appeared to be a simple thing but is actually much more complicated than and not at all as simple as it seems. The aim of Science is to make things simple and to arrive at a solution that is at the end simple and understandable even though the process of explanation is complex. But one must take care not to make a judgmental error and mistakenly take the facts as simple just because we want to arrive at a simple solution. Arriving at a simple solution does not warrant an improper and simple validation of facts where the roadmap to the solution might actually be complex and tough. This well might lead to a wrong judgment. The dictum also holds true with respect to poems within languages. The line of a poem on the superficial level may connote something very simple but taken within the overall context of the poem, it might connote something else and might convey a deeper meaning or sense. There are double entendres which use different meaning of words and different interpretations of the same meaning. For example in a James Bond Movie, ‘Diamonds are Forever’, there is a piece of conversation that happens between James Bond and Plenty o Toole which is the name of a female character who is also very beautiful and is naturally gifted with a voluptuously attractive figure which is further highlighted by a low cut purple satin dress that emphasizes her cleavage. There is a dialogue that takes place between James and Plenty in which Plenty O Toole says ‘Hi, I’m Plenty’ wherein she is referring to her name and James replies back ‘Well Of Course You are’ wherein he is also referring to her fulsome and appealing bodily figure. The reply might seem simple but actually conveys a double meaning. I would like to conclude, that as human beings we all like things and end results to be made simple for a lucid understanding without too much clutter and complexities surrounding us. Therefore, we all seek simplicity as a solution but we must understand that the path towards simplicity or a simple result might not necessarily be outright and plain simple. In fact, to arrive at a simple theory, the process that has to be followed is not at all easy and should not be construed as being simple because the quest to simplicity is arduous as it involves questioning many aspects and thus is overall complex in nature. We should be ready to take up the difficult path of reasoning, questioning and cross questioning till we arrive at a solution which is well verified and checked from all perspectives. The end result will actually be simple but each step taken to arrive at the next step will have to undergo the rigors of testing the complexities involved from a great many angles and perspectives, and each perspective howsoever simple it might seem should be distrusted and independently verified. Each seemingly simple proof or fact or argument should not be taken on face value and be relied upon due to any fallacy of misinterpreting that simplicity of solutions warrant simplicity of actions taken to reach the solution. This will never lead to the right solution because the facts will not be tested judiciously. Therefore, ‘We must Seek Simplicity in that we must seek the most simple solutions or answers to difficult questions but we also must distrust simplicity in that we must avoid the temptation of not testing our views enough and we must focus on penetrating into each step of solving the solution and not avoid the complexities involved in doing so.’