The Scientific Method
Starting around the 16th century, our "ascent" to a separate human realm underwent a dramatic acceleration. Language, technology, number, image, and time each became the object of an ambition of Babelian audacity: to extend their demesnes to encompass the whole of reality. Although hints of this program can be found in ancient times, in Greek and Biblical urges to exert dominion over the world, it was only with the Scientific Revolution that we began to envision a plausible means to actually achieve it.
Four centuries later, we see a world utterly transformed. Miracles and magic, the province of the gods, now operate on a daily basis. Instantaneous communication across continents, travel through the air, entire books at the press of a button, perfect moving images, and much more are now commonplace—thanks to science. It is to science that we owe civilization's ascent. It is science, we believe, that has lifted us above primitive superstition to obtain verifiable, objective knowledge. Science, the crowning achievement of modern man. Science, unlocking the deepest secrets of the universe. Science, destined to bring the whole of the universe into the human realm of understanding and control.
The very adjective "scientific" implies deep suppositions about the nature of reality and our relationship to reality. Science offers prescriptions on how to live life and how to organize society, how to understand the world and how to pursue knowledge; it tells us who we are, how we came to be, where we are going. Speaking of another culture, we might describe these prescriptions and these stories about the way of the world as a religion. For ourselves, we call them truth, fact, science—fundamentally different from other cultures' myths. But why?
Our culture is not alone in believing its myths and stories to be special. We think that ours are true for real, while other cultures merely believed theirs to be true. What are our justifications? Two stand out, one theoretical and one practical: the doctrine of objectivity, and the power of technology.
Tags
Who is online
418 visitors
On the practical level, we believe in the validity of our science because of the great and demonstrable power it has given us, through technology, to manipulate the material environment. The world of our experience—an artificial world, a human world—is science materialized. The very existence of the world we live in is proof of the validity of science. The god Science has given us the ability to reshape the very landscape, alter the code of life, and enact the "magic and miracles" enumerated above. Having given us such tangible power, how could it be a false god?
Yet it is not hard to imagine other cultures that would dismiss our power over the physical environment as inconsequential, an unimportant aspect of life, or that would even deny that our power is really so great. Do we not eat, sleep, pass waste, make love, grow old, grow sick, and die as all other human beings? Do we not experience the same gamut of emotions as human beings everywhere and everywhen? Henry Miller said,
We devise astounding means of communication, but do we communicate with one another? We move our bodies to and fro at incredible speeds, but do we really leave the spot we started from? Mentally, morally, spiritually, we are fettered. What have we achieved in mowing down mountain ranges, harnessing the energy of mighty rivers, or moving whole populations about like chess pieces, if we ourselves remain the same restless, miserable, frustrated creatures we were before? To call such activity progress is utter delusion. We may succeed in altering the face of the earth until it is unrecognizable even to the Creator, but if we are unaffected wherein lies the meaning?[1]
Yes, we can move mountains and build skyscrapers and talk with people on the other side of the world, but perhaps the importance we place on these things as demonstrations of the truth of our science, of our stories, says more about our values and emphasis than it does about their ultimate validity.
E.A " The Science Method " has failed/is failing, all because " ALL Science institutions " had/have entrance Criteria, that need those applying to accept the DOGMA before entry, it is like a " Closed religious Shop " only adherents are allowed entrance and thereafter must abide the DOGMA forever more with the fear of being " Exiled " by their Peers if not!
For an Example see My Blog " Censorship " as an Ideal Example of how Anything is Muzzled that does not suit the Minority running the System!
I'm not sure what your seed's point is, Larry. People are people regardless of technological context?
I like to read both historical fiction and science fiction, where the contexts are different from ours... and people are still people...
I'm into non fiction myself.
People are people regardless of technological context?
...or, precisely because of that context. Our use of Science and it's tool technology, as part-n-parcel in an evolutionary context even.
Human's responsibility to pointedly and judiciously, being aware that we are a part of a whole in the Natural world; part of a coevolving biosphere, and that we directly impact it. This article speaks to a question about how well our science has effectively achieved that.
A couple of good articles here on the NTer's related to the points I raise...
https://thenewstalkers.com/community/discussion/37183/lets-talk-about-scale
Both science and religions seek answers to the same questions, though both have fallen far too short.
Religion divides people into opposing camps, science has the power to unite us. The truth about who we are and where we came from is the same for every human being.