Frasi di David Bohm
Data di nascita: 20. Dicembre 1917
Data di morte: 27. Ottobre 1992
Altri nomi:دیوید بوهم
David Bohm è stato un fisico e filosofo statunitense.
Sviluppò l'approccio delle onde pilota di Louis de Broglie, essenzialmente connesso con l'approssimazione di gradiente di densità della fisica dei dispositivi, giungendo all'elaborazione della cosiddetta interpretazione di Bohm della meccanica quantistica, nota anche come teoria De Broglie-Bohm...
Frasi David Bohm
„Si direbbe che Atman è più come il significato. Ma allora ciò che si intende sarebbe Brahman, suppongo; l'identità fra la coscienza e il cosmo.... Ciò che si sta affermando è che il significato e ciò che viene significato sono in definitiva uno, che è la frase 'Atman uguale Brahman' della filosofia classica hindu.“
„Qual è la fonte di tutti questi problemi? Sto affermando che la fonte è principalmente nel pensiero. Molti potrebbero pensare che questa è cosa da pazzi, dato che il pensiero è l'unica cosa che abbiamo per risolvere i nostri problemi. Fa parte della nostra tradizione. Eppure sembra che ciò che usiamo per risolvere i nostri problemi sia la fonte dei nostri problemi. È come andare dal dottore e dopo restarne ammalati.“
„There is a difficulty with only one person changing. People call that person a great saint or a great mystic or a great leader, and they say, 'Well, he's different from me - I could never do it.' What's wrong with most people is that they have this block - they feel they could never make a difference, and therefore, they never face the possibility, because it is too disturbing, too frightening.“
„For both the rich and the poor, life is dominated by an ever growing current of problems, most of which seem to have no real and lasting solution. Clearly we have not touched the deeper causes of our troubles. It is the main point of this book that the ultimate source of all these problems is in thought itself, the very thing of which our civilization is most proud, and therefore the one thing that is “hidden” because of our failure seriously to engage with its actual working in our own individual lives and in the life of society.“
„But what is [the] quality of originality? It is very hard to define or specify. Indeed, to define originality would in itself be a contradiction, since whatever action can be defined in this way must evidently henceforth be unoriginal. Perhaps, then, it will be best to hint at it obliquely and by indirection, rather than to try to assert positively what it is.
One prerequisite for originality is clearly that a person shall not be inclined to impose his preconceptions on the fact as he sees it. Rather, he must be able to learn something new, even if this means that the ideas and notions that are comfortable or dear to him may be overturned.
But the ability to learn in this way is a principle common to the whole of humanity. Thus it is well known that a child learns to walk, to talk, and to know his way around the world just by trying something out and seeing what happens, then modifying what he does (or thinks) in accordance with what has actually happened. In this way, he spends his first few years in a wonderfully creative way, discovering all sorts of things that are new to him, and this leads people to look back on childhood as a kind of lost paradise. As the child grows older, however, learning takes on a narrower meaning. In school, he learns by repetition to accumulate knowledge, so as to please the teacher and pass examinations. At work, he learns in a similar way, so as to make a living, or for some other utilitarian purpose, and not mainly for the love of the action of learning itself. So his ability to see something new and original gradually dies away. And without it there is evidently no ground from which anything can grow.“
— David Bohm, On Creativity
„individual thought is mostly the result of collective thought and of interaction with other people. The language is entirely collective, and most of the thoughts in it are. Everybody does his own thing to those thoughts – he makes a contribution. But very few change them very much.“
— David Bohm, On Dialogue