Abstract concepts bothered humanity since the emergence of such thing as free time in human life. Since then, the snowball started rolling, and now we have a whole lot of fields of thought that deal solely with abstract entities. Moreover, most of them we call “science.” While abstract entities are more or less understandable, it is really hard to say whether this transition from the real world to the world of abstraction was useful. And by mentioning transition to the abstract, I do not mean only mathematics or physics or any other sole field of science, but the transition of the totality of human attention towards abstract rather than concrete matters. The social networks, the Internet, electronic currencies, television and other pleasant inventions are the most contemporary and actual examples of this process. However, whatever the particulars of the movement towards the abstract may be, the process in its whole is of much larger interest than its examples. Some may say that such transition signifies the development of humans' rational abilities and indicate the overall progress of our species. Others may find that this process drives us away from nature from which we originate and will not bring any good, perhaps even mentioning the genius mathematicians who became insane. I think that I am more of the former group because I think that the road of conquering the abstract will bring us to higher peaks of our development.
Having discussed abstractness in general, I want to give special attention to one of its particular cases to which David Foster Wallace gave that much attention. And of course I am talking about the concept of infinity. It is funny to note that I have been thinking about the concept of infinity recently, just before reading the excerpt from his book. The thoughts I had before which were bothering me were also the ones which were confirmed after reading Wallace’s thoughts. Indeed, the whole concept of infinity is abstract to its very core, because there is no such thing as infinity in the real world. In fact, it cannot even exist in this world. Whatever quantities are to be measured or computed in our universe, be they even transcomputational, they still are finite. Whatever it may be – the number of particles in the universe or the quantity of ultranano-instants passed since the Big Bang, or even googolplex (that is 10googol, googol is 10100), it still would be finite. It is because of its abstract nature, that infinity is prone to different kinds of contradictions and paradoxes. From childish like “Can an omnipotent being make something too heavy for him to lift” (Wallace 22) to more serious ones. For example, there cannot theoretically exist an infinite amount of anything. Even if it was the smallest subatomic particle, multiplied by infinity, it would inevitably take all the place in the universe. The same applies to the infinite force, if the magnitude of any given force was infinite, be it attraction or repel, it would inevitably disrupt the cosmos, as we know it, in an instant.
However, besides such contradictory nature, infinity is still a very useful abstraction. It helps us not in mathematics, physics, and computations, but is it somehow pertinent to our daily life? I think the answer will be yes and no at the same time. It depends on what to call daily life. If we take general actions like buying something or going for a walk, then the answer perhaps would be no. However, if the reflections about the nature of knowledge, the future fate of the universe, or finding out the pathway to enlightenment, and all of the similar sort in which we eventually engage in the shower or somewhere else, then we can proudly consider infinity to be an integral part of our lives.
Works cited
Wallace, David Foster. Everything And More. New York: Atlas Book, 2003. Print.
