Is it not strange that the local microscopic details of the world picture or the great work of art are one-hundred-per-cent logical or useful, while the whole is intrinsically one-hundred-per-cent useless or illogical?
1394. And is it not equally strange that nowhere within the visual range of the individual living being's little mayfly life or glimpse of life that is called a "terrestrial life" can one find anything similar in the same plan of creation. Here it emerges that there is not one single phenomenon that does not carry out some real and absolutely useful mission. Do not the eyes of the living beings exist in order to give their originators sight? Do not the organs of smell, taste and touch exist in order to provide their originators with equally indispensable functions? Does not every little normal phenomenon of the living beings' organisms, whether of plants, animals or within the terrain of terrestrial human beings, serve a useful purpose, each of them being an indispensable, organic phenomenon? Is not honey delicious food for bees, and is not the most noble fruit flesh of the vegetable world an equally delicious food for human beings? Are not the rain and sunshine equally useful? Is not the existence of the oceans in a world inhabited by terrestrial human beings as indispensable as the existence of the continents? Where is there any normal phenomenon, untouched by a terrestrial human being, among the real, practically accessible details of this vast creation that is not useful? The whole of this great creation, down to its microscopic details, is thus one-hundred-per-cent useful, which is of course also what it must be, for how could the Earth otherwise have become such a glorious creation, such a splendid world for animal life as it is? The microscopic or minute details of this huge, millions-of-years-long creation that we call the "universe" are thus one-hundred-per-cent useful for the emergence and welfare of the whole, and without this fact it could not possibly have become as perfect as it actually is. But this very whole, the finished result, is literally of no use whatsoever because there is no eye to see it and no ear to hear it, or rather no living being to see it as a purely practical, physical experience. A living being that has come into existence and that must die again cannot possibly experience or survey "eternity". Purely practically and physically it can survey only the little second of eternity that its physical terrestrial life represents, regardless of whether this may be hundreds or thousands of years. This terrestrial life could not possibly change anything in the absurdity that this entire world picture represents or displays compared with the subtle, almost incomprehensible logic with which all the particulars of its microscopic details are built up, and which are available to the living beings' powers of observation in their equally microscopic life form or terrestrial life. Is it not strange that the microscopic details of the whole of this creation are one-hundred-per-cent logical, while the completed creation or the whole is one-hundred-per-cent useless?
Return to start page
Previous