boothy wrote:
Limiting or realistic? Looking for something that isn’t there never is much use.
Deciding that something is definately not there because you cannot see it, weigh it, count it or measure it is distinctly limiting.
Science of the day laughed at and dismissed the concept of ‘microbes’ when first suggested. Of course they were there. Looking for something that ‘wasn’t there’ was profoundly useful in that instance.
Maintaining an open mind is somewhat less limiting than affirming or negating a given concept when the evidence is incomplete. This goes for all unknowns, whether scientific, philosophical, spiritual or whatever.
