I was cooking soup today. It seemed to take forever to come to a boil. Which reminded me....
I have a friend who used to reply, "Yes it does" whenever someone said "A watched pot never boils." If people looked surprised he'd say, "I tested it."
What he had done was take two pots of equal size and made of the same metal. He measured the same amount of water into each and put them over the same level of heat. Then he watched one but not the other. "The watched one not only boiled, it boiled at the same time as the other one."
OK. So why do that? (Except to get a laugh-- he did get a few over the years.) I mean everyone knows that a watched pot will boil. Everyone knows that the saying is just a figurative way of saying we need to be patient and we might as well occupy ourselves with something else when we are waiting for something to happen. So why prove the saying wrong?
Are there things in the world that "everyone knows" but that need to be proved anyway? Might there be exercises like this that might prove something that "everyone knows" to be wrong?
On the other hand, are there more significant studies that have been done that really shouldn't have been needed to be done. One book I read noted that a study had proven breast milk was better for babies than formula. "Why", he asked, "would such a study be needed?" Whether he was right about that specific study or not are there others we wouldn't need if we were more in tune with nature?
Or maybe with God's way of doing things? Are there things that we test when we should trust?
Just wondering a bit....do you have any thoughts on this?
I have a friend who used to reply, "Yes it does" whenever someone said "A watched pot never boils." If people looked surprised he'd say, "I tested it."
What he had done was take two pots of equal size and made of the same metal. He measured the same amount of water into each and put them over the same level of heat. Then he watched one but not the other. "The watched one not only boiled, it boiled at the same time as the other one."
OK. So why do that? (Except to get a laugh-- he did get a few over the years.) I mean everyone knows that a watched pot will boil. Everyone knows that the saying is just a figurative way of saying we need to be patient and we might as well occupy ourselves with something else when we are waiting for something to happen. So why prove the saying wrong?
Are there things in the world that "everyone knows" but that need to be proved anyway? Might there be exercises like this that might prove something that "everyone knows" to be wrong?
On the other hand, are there more significant studies that have been done that really shouldn't have been needed to be done. One book I read noted that a study had proven breast milk was better for babies than formula. "Why", he asked, "would such a study be needed?" Whether he was right about that specific study or not are there others we wouldn't need if we were more in tune with nature?
Or maybe with God's way of doing things? Are there things that we test when we should trust?
Just wondering a bit....do you have any thoughts on this?
Plus, it's hard to get a decent answer from a baby....."cry louder if you like formula better than breast milk".....
ReplyDeleteVery true :)
ReplyDeleteAh, Melinda.
ReplyDeleteStudies are done to generate money! But, seriously...
The watched pot is all about perception. We watch a pot to see if it boils, because we want to do something with it, or use it for something else. So, we feel the duration more intensely.
The breast milk study was done to stop the BS in advertising, convincing mothers to BUY something they can provide their children FREE that is better.
Mmmm... I see what you mean.
ReplyDelete