Future Science, Future Scientist: Reconnecting with the Reflective and Contempla

Philip Goyal

Sophisticated abstract thought is perhaps humanity’s greatest asset, and language its most important technology. But abstract thought begs an ever-present question: to what extent does the content and patterns of our thoughts align with what we call reality; to what extent are they are a reliable guide to our explorations of reality? Modern science is an exemplar of a social activity that methodically addresses this alignment problem, and has given rise to abstract thought systems that reflect aspects of physical reality with astonishing precision. Owing to its numerous discoveries and the transformative technologies based upon them, its underpinning mechanical conception of reality has profoundly shaped how we think about reality. However, I believe that the successes of modern science have dulled our sensitivity to the alignment problem, leading to complacency in accepting many aspects of the mechanistic conception as essentially correct, save for minor corrections in the microscopic realm. I believe that in order to ensure the continued evolution of human thought and to maximize the creative potential of science, it is essential that we critically examine the metaphysical underpinnings of modern science in light of its products, and sympathetically consider other metaphysical perspectives. In particular, the construction of a coherent metaphysical conception of reality that accounts for the full content of quantum theory is vital, for it would provide a physically well-founded alternative to the mechanical conception. However, I contend that the organization, practice, and teaching of modern science is presently too far skewed towards the utilitarian and pragmatic to effectively engage in such a task. A transformation is needed, one that reconnects science with reflective and contemplative modes of being at both individual and disciplinary levels.

Download Essay PDF File

Download Reference PDF File

Vladimir Rogozhin

Philip Goyal
An excellent, deep essay, the ideas of which are aimed at overcoming the modern conceptual - paradigmatic crisis of the metaphysical / ontological basis of fundamental science, manifesting itself as a "crisis of understanding" (J. Horgan "The End of Science", Kopeikin K.V. "Souls" of atoms and "atoms" of the soul : Wolfgang Ernst Pauli, Carl Gustav Jung and "three great problems of physics"), "crisis of interpretation and representation" (Romanovskaya T.B. "Modern physics and contemporary art - parallels of style" ), "loss of certainty" (Kline M . "Mathematics: Loss of Certainty"), "trouble with physics" (Lee Smolin "Trouble with Physics").

Therefore, I agree with these important conclusions:

<<It is my contention that, to safeguard the creative flexibility of human thought and consider modern science, it is essential at this moment in history to methodically and critically reflect upon and clarify the metaphysical underpinnings of modern science, and sympathetically metaphysical views—both western and non-western—in light of the products of modern science and its open questions.>>

<<I believe that science as we know it must undergo a thorough-going transformation which reconnects it with the reflective and contemplative modes of being, both at the level of the individual scientist and at the level of the intellectual disciplines that exemplify these modes of being.>>

Disagree with this conclusion:

<<As mentioned earlier, a major open task in physics since the creation of quantum mechanics is the construction of a conception of reality that does justice to the mathematical formalism of these theories. To my mind, it is essential that such a conception—a quantum conception of reality—be constructed, so that scientists may be in possession of a richly detailed alternative to mechanical conception, based on our most powerful physical theory.>>

Quantum theory, theory of relativity - phenomenological theories (parametric, operationalistic, "effective") theories without ontological justification / substantiation (ontological basification). The problem with the ontological foundation of mathematics also remains unresolved. Physicists and mathematicians have only one alternative - the holistic paradigm, which should come to the aid of the "paradigm of the part" (mechanistic), which is now dominant in science. And this means, first to build a metaphysical / ontological basis of knowledge (ontological framework, carcass, foundation), taking into account the entire development of science and philosophy over the entire period and taking into account all the problems in the foundations, and then to build an "super-generalizing" theory based on the paradigm of the Universe as the eternal holistic process of generating more and more new meanings, forms and structures (material and ideal). The idea of constructing such a theory was proposed by the mathematician and philosopher V. Nalimov (1996) - "a super-unified field theory describing both physical and semantic manifestations of the World." ("The Self-Aware Universe")
[https://web.archive.org/web/20111205183605/http://v-nalimov.ru/articles/111/395/]
This requires a new look at matter.

In the same direction, the ideas of the Nobel laureate in physics Brian Josephson (which are not very noticed by mainstream science), set forth in the essay "On the Fundamentality of Meaning"
[https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/3088]

I fully agree with this conclusion:
<<Human society is at a uniquely perilous moment. ... As such, scientists are in a unique position to guide humanity through what awaits it in the coming centuries. A science that is more integrated, more balanced, more enlightened, will be a better, wiser, guide.>>

Humanity continues to rapidly fall into the future. And therefore, the philosophical precepts of John A. Wheeler, "unsung paragon of science" are very important for scientists:
"Philosophy is too important to be left to philosophers."
"We are no longer satisfied with insights only into particles, fields of force, into geometry, or even into time and space. Today we demand of physics some understanding of existence itself."
"To my mind there must be, at the bottom of it all, not an equation, but an utterly simple idea. And to me that idea, when we discover it, will be so compelling, so inevitable, that we will say to one another, 'Oh, how beautiful. How could it have been otherwise?'"

And for this, the Big Ontological revolution is needed in the foundations of knowledge. Physics must move from the stage "Phenomenological physics" to the stage "Ontological physics".
A.N. Whitehead: “A precise language must await a completed metaphysical knowledge.”

Alex

Thanks for an eminently readable essay. The themes you identify keep cropping up time and again, without a critical mass of engagement coming from within the scientific community.

"[Can science] as a whole ... prosper without seriously engaging in foundational and philosophical reflection. I believe that while it may prosper for some time, the lack of such foundations will ultimately prove a limit-ing factor."

Well, that's the crux of it, and I think we are already seeing it in more "abstract" fields ie fields that are not seen as immediately utile, say, for example, in grant distributions and funding. I think it's a little depressing to say the least!

I've touched on similar points in my essay, identifying the limiting factor with the pervasive effect of unexamined general bias and over-reliance on uncritical "commonsense". Unfortunately, I think the only meaningful change will need to come from within the community - a prospect that at this stage still seems remote.

Alaya Kouki

Until now we still use Greek philosophy in physics. Take for example the equivalence of unity and multiplicity we find it the wave-corpuscle duality or the equivalence between motion and rest we find it in Relativity.
In the Arab philosophy the assertion that "every mobile have a motor" is equivalent that space is not empty and there is always energy to fit him (with negative pressure in general relativity).
Perhaps an open problem is how to extract vacuum energy to human use. I see a video on twiter where an african person connect two sides of a stone extracted from a mine and get electricity: is this a mean to extract vacuum energy?

cristi marcovici

at the second view of the essay i have to add that a procrastinating activity like sewing , knitting, building a chair, i don't know,maybe even searching in trash, (counting steps) painting , brings up utility and contemplation

here what is missing is the idea that deaf people can do philosophy in sign ~~language~~ interaction, ,never encountered such individual , i would appreciate if i have the occasion.

Sue Lingo

A well researched and informative discussion that extracts directives for change from a broad historical spectrum.

"Sophisticated abstract thought is perhaps humanity"s greatest asset, and language its most important technology."

Even a great asset can be misapplied.

Abstraction that can not be derived... i e. exhibit an unbroken kinematic logic link... from a Fact, generates dogma, and language utilized as a means to obscure Fact-less abstraction is a technological pollution of one's mental environment.

A desire to know to what extent our abstractions are "aligned with that which we call reality" fuels humanity's quest to reveal the fundamental Facts of reality.

The enigma of utilizing Fact-less abstracted thought to "determine where and how thought is misaligned, and how to best correct it"... exposes the necessity to prioritize verification of a fundamental Fact.

To "accurately describe the nature of the microscopic constituents of matter" does not facilitate a Factual basis for abstraction if one cannot objectify the constituents, and to pretend otherwise is "inhibiting the evolution of human thought"... i.e. constrains humanity's quest to reveal the fundamental Facts of reality.

To develop a "coherent conception of reality that does justice to the full content of quantum theory" requires objectification of the fundamental elements of emergence... i.e. momentum mechanism, unit of substance, and a distribution structure... within a non-perthrbative analysis environment.

An initial state reduction process will reveal either a Fact based distinction between "physical" and "metaphysical", or a Fact based unification of "physical" and "metaphysical".

Although my 2023FQXi Essay: "Digital Science: Emergence of Quantum Consciousness" (http://uqsmatrixmechanix.com/2023FQXiEssay4pdfconv.php) was intended as a demonstration of how a non-perturbative analysis structure would change science, the demonstration objectified a momentum mechanism as a single point pulse sourced emission of substance as spatially defined minimum/indivisible quanta of Energy (QE), which not only unifies "physical" and "metaphysical", but also inherently resolves all forces as derived of a single force, and consequently FQXi rejected my essay as being an ""alternative ""theory of everything"", not an essay about ow science could be different"".

The degree to which a "coherent conception of reality" reveals a Fact based "unitary mathematical order", and sustains one's belief that there "is a reliable method by which we can gain access to that order", is becoming "increasingly important to the survival and thriving" of the species.

Given "new approaches to theory-building"... e.g. digital CAD SIM technology and an evolved conceptual analysis environment... the "reductive thinking characteristic of mechanical philosophy" may serve revelation of an accessible Universal Intelligence as a fundamental Fact inherent in Space-Time Energy emergence.

Thank you for a knowledgeable and thought provoking essay that gives credence to the potential existence of a universally networked intelligence.

S. Lingo
UQS Author/Logician
(http://www.uqsmatrixmechanix.com)

cristi marcovici

third view - I II III IV V AB VI
brings the following ideas
I) Mechanical timekeeping moment by moment, vs year by year agricultural time
II) designing long term (cultural) watches , decades / centuries
|||) a history that does not take into account, (lacks) deaf
IV) in a reframing of terms contemplative reflective are still contained at the end of utilitarian spectrum, the more people know, the more they should become a central part of it
V) B has inspired an previous comment i have made last week
VI) II)

to contemplate originate in to look at something, to admire (a temple, be silent in a church),
imagine being deaf among other people for a considerable amount of time ,
this reciept potentially brings isolation , create a temple in your own mind.