We tend to base our understanding on a 'cause and effect' paradigm, quite evident in science. Further,...

Question

...we look to 'observables,' i.e. things that can be sensed and measured like time, distance, temperature, to be the 'cause' part of this paradigm. Yet many things are left unexplainable in life. In large measure, we have become accustomed to this, and simply refer to it as fate, destiny, chance, etc. Suppose, however, we arbitrarily limit our understanding to 'observables.' Do you think their may be things, or thing, we cannot observe that nevertheless exist(s) and influence(s) our lives?

OK...back to my day job...gotta get to work :-).

Answer 1

Well, now, that's very Eastern of you. You seem to believe that because there is not always a direct "cause and effect" relationship between the reaction and the events prior to it, that there may be some sort of reason for the abandonment of logic as a tool?
You are correct that the true cause of an event may be unobserved, but that is no reason not to attempt to DEDUCE the existence of that cause. That is what science is all about ... sort of a Sherlock Holmes-ian ellimination of the impossible, leaving the truth, however improbable it may be.
Were we to "limit our understanding to 'observables'" we would find out ability to learn new things severely curtailed, and our progress circumscribed to the merely physical limits of our world. Say good-bye to physics, ta-ta to nanotech, ciao-bella to philosophy, arrive-derci to psychology, and bye-bye to sociology ... most of which sciences have progressed far beyond the merely observable.
Cheers. And don't work too hard.

Answer 2

One very formidable reason we understand in a "cause and effect" paradigm is that our consciousness only understands a very short moment of the observable world at a time. Also our way of understanding is usually through association.

An event may have a causal relation which flows backward in time, but our observation only allows us to view the event in one direction and so the true nature of the unobservable thing was not readily verified by us. We could think before and after, but reversing it to after then before seems strange to any of us.

I could not deny that there may be things existing outside of the measurable senses, but what good would they do if we could not even indirectly verify their behaviors with our ideas about them?

Answer 3

Cause and effect is only applicable in the 'big' world. At the quantum level it has been discovered that things go a little pear shaped in terms of conventional physics.
It is possible (theoretically - the maths is a lot horrendous) for the cause to be the effect itself (very, very simplistic - the full explanation requires books!). The act of observation actually influences the outcome of many events. It's incredible to study, it hurts like mad and turns your perceptions on their head, but it is well worth the atempt!

Answer 4

Absolutely - there are many things going on which we do not observe with our senses.

For starters, consider neutrinos, which almost never interact with other matter. While you are reading this, a few million have passed through your body. Once in a zillion years, one will interact with you, perhaps flipping an electron in one of your neurons and causing a random thought in your head.

Our senses have evolved only to detect the most commonly useful physical phenomena, other animals have senses that we don't. There is no reason why there couldn't be still other senses, possessed by no animals.

Not only are our senses limited, but our ability to comprehend the cause of a phenomenon is limited too. Keep in mind that we can never prove that one particular action caused a certain result. We can only observe the *pattern* of that type of action repeatedly causing that type of result.

Time and again, we discover that cause-effect patterns we thought were simple are actually complex and have exceptions we were not aware of. The reason why we have this problem is that we do not have perfect knowledge of anything in the real world. We can only understand cause-and-effect in closed systems, like checkers games, where it is possible to enumerate all the possible interactions.

Finally, there is also the potential issue of higher dimensions which we are not aware of. Imagine creatures who live in a two-dimensional world, like living under a microscope slide. From their viewpoint, 3-D beings (like us) have magical powers; we can apparently move from one point (in their world) to another by magic. There may be higher-dimensional creatures to whom the time dimension is as easy to traverse as the 2nd dimension is to us.

If any higher-dimensional creatures exist, we would likewise perceive their powers as being magical. To us, they would be like God. And, we don't know what we don't know.

Shakespeare: "There are more things under heaven and earth than are dreamt of in your philosophy, Horatio"

Answer 5

There may be things that influence the world that are not observable. We can't rule it out, but we also can't use it to explain events until we at least find observable and measurable effects.

If it is unobservable and cannot be quantified (even on a nominal scale) then it is as if it doesn't exist. We cannot see it, ascribe effects to it or control it.

Answer 6

just because you don't see it , doesn't mean it's not there. never stop asking questions , even if you think the answers are already evident .