Timeline for Why does my mind naturally wander?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 1, 2017 at 19:11 | comment | added | santa100 | But how can you separate the mind from its bio/physiological processes that involves all kinds of chemical/physical interactions? You can't. And if you can't, then you cannot conclude that entropy is not useful. To understand entropy is to understand the process of becoming, accruing, decay, and destruction. I don't know about you, but it certainly arouses lots of viriya/energy to strive harder and at the same time, a sense of samvega also. | |
| Jan 1, 2017 at 18:59 | comment | added | ChrisW♦ | I'm not sure that "entropy" a useful model of the mind. Entropy is a property of (physical) thermodynamic systems; the connection (if any) between mind and matter isn't obvious; and "life" is a local reversal of entropy, isn't it? I suppose you're saying that entropy predicts cessation of the thermodynamic universe, but I'm not sure how that's a useful answer to the OP's question (except that, maybe, theories about physics try to be objective and self-less). Is the entropy model even prescriptive, does the model prescribe a solution (e.g. what is "effort" within that frame of reference)? | |
| Jan 1, 2017 at 18:30 | comment | added | santa100 | It's a fact that oceans, mountains, land masses do move. We just don't live long enough to see that. And notice, moving or "wandering" is just one manifestation among many manifestations of entropy. As long as any phenomenon "move" from order to disorder, stability to chaos, creation to destruction, that's entropy. To say that entropy is not a useful model is the same as saying that anicca is not useful, or the 4 stages of formations of becoming, accruing, fading away, and destruction are not useful. | |
| Jan 1, 2017 at 16:31 | comment | added | ChrisW♦ | I'm not sure that it's a useful model (i.e. an appropriate model to mention in this context). Would you, for example, say that the ocean wanders "because of entropy"? | |
| Dec 31, 2016 at 18:37 | comment | added | santa100 | Since the original question is not particular toward a technical Buddhist topic, but about the scattering mind in general, I simply don't see the need to limit the answer to a "traditional Buddhist answer". I find it actually pigeonholes one's understanding and prevent one from seeing things in a bigger picture. | |
| Dec 31, 2016 at 18:08 | comment | added | Tenzin Dorje | I suggest that you give the kind of answer that Saurabh Padwekar could not get anywhere but on a Buddhist platform. Something like a traditional Buddhist answer. | |
| Dec 31, 2016 at 17:30 | history | answered | santa100 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |