0

In this following context, how should I take the bold and italic sentence?

Should I take it as: 'it is no longer known more important than all.'?

Should I take its concept meaning as: 'the matter is known nothing rather than all changing.'?

Context:

Till recently scientists believed in an indivisible and indestructible atom. “For sufficient reasons physicists have reduced this atom to a series of events. For equally good reasons psychologists find that mind has not the identity of a single continuing thing but is a series of occurrences bound together by certain intimate relations. The question of immortality, therefore, has become the question whether these intimate relations exist between occurrences connected with a living body and other occurrences which take place after that body is dead.”

As C. E. M. Joad says in The Meaning of Life, “matter has since disintegrated under our very eyes. It is no longer solid; it is no longer enduring; it is no longer determined by compulsive causal laws; and more important than all, it is no longer known. The so-called atoms, it seems, are both ‘divisible and destructible.” The electrons and protons that compose atoms ‘can meet and annihilate one another while their persistence, such as it is, is rather that of a wave lacking fixed boundaries, and in process of continual change both as regards shape and position than that of a thing.”

Source: P. 59 Buddhism in a Nutshell by Narada Thera

2
  • You need to give more context. Sep 9, 2023 at 12:21
  • Thanks @Dheeraj Verma. I put more context there. I hope your explanation to this.
    – Sakya Kim
    Sep 9, 2023 at 13:10

1 Answer 1

0

“It is no longer known” means that science now says that everything is now quantum mechanical. It is no longer known how to interpret quantum mechanics…

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .