Thinking in Science

The idea of ‘thinking in science’ should not be considered a science but an art premised on the existence of a transcendent scientist whom they must imitate to achieve in microcosm, the success He has achieved in macrocosm. Similar bias has been a feature of western intellectual history and this is being illustrated in H.T. Wilson’s book, The American ideology thus;

?

?The idea that knowledge is inherently neutral, that there is a unitary scientific method, or that science provides the preeminent explanatory model against which social sciences must measure themselves constitutes the epistemic foundation of the American ideology. 21

?

The proposition of this book differs from the said ideology in that it does not assume the preeminence of science all the time but recognizes even above science (in different cases), the importance of critical thinking, historicism and direct transcendence all encapsulated in dialectics. Why then have we chosen to adopt multiple methods, some may wonder. Haven’t the scripture’s author of proverbs advised us to trust the Lord with all our hearts and lean not on our own understanding? On a personal level, yes and also in a thinly ideal society where there is zero plurality of faith (such societies virtually does not exist). Problem does not arise from trusting per se, but who to be trusted, the lord who shares a view on marriage or another? The lord who places premium on holiness or another who emphasizes more on kindness. We are forced to stick with secularism to retain our nationhood, yet we cannot depart totally from our morality for it is in them, many believe, that true meaning lies. Even in predominantly Christian America, there seems to be many lords22, one who thinks homosexuals are cool, and another who cannot wait to throw them into fire. I am persuaded to consider that the one Lord manifests in several ways that every nation may till their own earth to bring forth their herbs. I am also led almost to a point of conviction that every nation is meant to christen the beasts of their lands and take dominion over their world.

?One language with which the lord speaks to the world is science and many nations that show the knowledge of this, consciously or not, have grown to become prosperous.

?May I explain before we deep further into this seemingly overindulgent system of thought. The foundations of many great nations of today, as we have seen in history, had been laid in times when sciences were truly one. The plurality of today, though well intentioned, had closed our eyes to the fact that the social sciences of today was inspired by natural science itself which is in turn rooted in philosophy. We should consider this when next we read Pythagoras the mathematician using his mathematics to philosophize or Schr?dinger turning a social commentator towards the end of his carrier as a quantum physicist. We may equally consider Einstein’s interest in philosophy and his efforts at utilizing the lessons of physics in pragmatic social living. Many of the world’s successful nations have their foundations in the works of the players of the enlightenment age, most of who are surprisingly religious. The situation is similar in some nations of the Middle East, as their history is replete with even older scientists and engineers.?

?Fortunately, leaders may not need to go to the laboratory to fathom how they can educate infant children or how to get the youths out of the street and get them busy. Some elements of the big R (from which we can derive our small rs) are quite visible to us and where they are not, history provides clues. Tyranny has been shown to be transitory, never sustainable or justifiable. Anything that undermines the happiness of individuals characteristically does not stand. Thomas Jefferson knew this to be true but recognized the futility of trying to state the basis for that absolute truth. He therefore referred to it as “self-evident”. Where there is no unanimity of idea, or in matters that lacks such absoluteness in our collective intuition, it becomes necessary to turn to history and where there is no precedence, we may synthesize reason from the lessons of science (positive or negative lessons) or from transcendent sources (where it is acceptable and applicable in the case of pluralistic societies).

?Why are the reasons, R and r so important? They are important because where there is no reason, according to that cliché, abuse is inevitable but it is not only abuse that is inevitable, persistent failure in government programs is, and poverty, diseases, ignorance, war, distrust, hate and corruption, among other vices.?Any nation without the big R for its existence needs not lay claim to having any dream nor is it worthy of the allegiance of the people in it. Anything goes in such nations. The foundation is faulty and every structure that comes on top is in the risk of crumbling.?

21.?The American ideology, H.T Wilson, Routledge & Kegan?Paul Ltd., 1997, pg. 16

?

22.???This sentiment is also expressed in President Barack Obama’s book, “The Audacity of Hope”