The World, Known and Unknown

The problem with the scientific method, as currently understood, is not in relation with anything that falls within its scope; the problem is with everything that does not fall within its scope.

Careful scientists avoid claiming too much; they understand the limits of their tools. About matters that cannot be proved or disproved, they know nothing and admit as much.

A less cautious mind is liable to fall victim to some common fallacies. One often hears someone pronouncing a verdict based on insufficient knowledge: “It has not been proved X exists; therefore it does not exist.” First, the lack of proof of the existence of a thing is not a proof of its non-existence. Second, the lack of proof may relate strictly to an individual or group that is not up to date on the latest revelations. Proof, in the last analysis, refers primarily to the subjectivity of the one who needs to be convinced, and not to the fact, be it admitted or not admitted, known or not known.

I may have to identify myself to the security guard at a checkpoint; but I know who I am prior to this. My identity does not spring into being by virtue of this social validation.

Scientists actually have no idea how much of the universe lies outside the scope of their method. Could it be 99.99%? If it were, would it make a difference?

We tend to believe we already know the world pretty much. We expect new discoveries to add some interesting details, but we do not expect the world to be turned upside down. In other words, we tend to see the world as a finished story, as something known.

The reason for this is that it is easier to deal with a world that one imagines one knows than to deal with a world one doesn’t know at all. It is convenient, for practical reasons, to make the assumption that we know the world 95% rather than 5%.

This “convenience” has nothing to do with the truth.

If one becomes interested in the truth, one may adjust the controls to open one’s mind and allow the unknown a larger place in one’s world view. Some cannot help doing this.

We might say they have been called.


要查看或添加评论,请登录

Stephen Raney的更多文章

  • Time and Evolution

    Time and Evolution

    Instead of theorizing about time, people can conduct practical experiments by using the time concept creatively. To do…

  • A Note on My Published Works

    A Note on My Published Works

    I have three major published works: "Spiritual Capitalism and Psychosynthesis" (2018) "Surveillance & Control" (2018)…

  • AI and Consciousness

    AI and Consciousness

    AI will never be conscious. AI cannot be programmed to develop consciousness, The programmers, despite their theories…

  • An Open Letter on V2k and Abusive Neuroscience

    An Open Letter on V2k and Abusive Neuroscience

    I am sending the following letter, or a variation of it, to attorneys, psychologists, journalists, physicians, human…

  • Mind Control

    Mind Control

    "Mind control," like "human experimentation," can be understood in two ways. It can refer to the efforts of an…

  • Individual Psychology and Global Politics

    Individual Psychology and Global Politics

    The relation between contemplation and individual activity is ultimately of more interest than any one-sided…

  • Free Will and Human Evolution

    Free Will and Human Evolution

    The will underlies human motion, mental and physical. As motion is interpreted in terms of the time concept, we are…

  • Existential Concerns

    Existential Concerns

    Existential Concerns We are only concerned about a proper understanding of “subjective” and “objective” because the two…

  • Objectivity Is Appearance, Not Truth

    Objectivity Is Appearance, Not Truth

    Phenomenologically speaking, objectivity is the appearance of things to the subjective consciousness. This remains true…

  • Individuality Is Universal

    Individuality Is Universal

    INDIVIDUALITY IS UNIVERSAL Introduction Existential psychology is defined and explored in terms of three basic factors:…

社区洞察

其他会员也浏览了