« Science has a radical distrust of certainty. Me too. | Main | What grounds religion and mysticism in reality? Nothing »

May 29, 2022


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

There are many languages to speak about the same.
The same can be attributed different [social-cultural] values and meanings

Scientists are involved with what they do not know [yet]
Mystics expres what they already know, they do so with the linguistic tools they have.

[Religious] Believers, are neither scientists nor mystics, they speak about what they do not know as if they know

And .... than there are many others, that are consumers; neither scientist, mystic or believer. They come with many different garbs, faces and intentions.

If you believe you know the truth about any thing (physical, emotional, psychological, or any combination thereof) your mind is closed to actuality.

Throughout your life you will encounter many things (as defined) that are true, but because of the actuality of impermanence and insubstantiality, none of them will be truths in or of themselves.

Whenever you become attached to the belief that you know some thing is a truth (as defined) you remain trapped in the world of conditioned subjective reality and inhibit the on-going learning opportunity that life presents in now-ness.

The wise adhere to the scientific method of inquiry to arrive at the most plausible current functional understanding of some thing (as defined) based in currently available credible evidence to inform their transitory view of things (as defined) and are unattached to beliefs about any thing (as defined).

Both Jim Al-Khalili and Carlo Rovelli (previous blog), express the science method of thinking and action well – with its strengths of testing and uncertainty. Previously Rovelli mentioned the principle of doubt to facilitate further enquiry and study which is what I applaud about science.

I for example, have grave doubts about knowledge gained through other practices. The reason being that the complexity of our brains can give rise (under certain circumstances) to various natural experiences that can be assumed to be spiritual or mystical. Such mental experiences are felt to be something more than a physical brain can produce, but the on-going research that emerges from neuroscience is showing that the brain and nervous system accounts for much that we once believed to be spiritual experiences.

We shouldn't be afraid to embrace such studies – but we are. We humans have a proclivity to look for something more that can somehow make us seem more special than the rest of the natural world, so gravitate toward that which appeals to our human ego. Perhaps we need to accept (or see) that we are just like any other life form we know of – we are born, exist for a while (with all that that entails) and then die. We, like everything else are impermanent. This we can be certain of. Anything else is quite possibly a series of beliefs based on what might be pleasing to imagine, rather than on evidence, rationality, or reality.

If people actually lived by the philosophy of science, which is observe first hand, explore, investigate, share results with peers, theorize, collaborate,hypothesize, then test those hypotheses, we would all have a lot less conflict in the world.

Second hand science, trusting the literature, is a necessary but lesser path to truth because we must trust other researchers' claims. We can't measure Everything ourselves. However, a hypothesis, built on the work of thousands who came before, not only confirms our added theory, but the basis of the entire theory and all the past results. This is the beauty of the absolute nature of scientific practice. Because in this sequential way, we test first hand a link to all the past of science. And thus we have our direct experience of observation, measurement and testing.

This is supported by rules of disclosure about method, to allow for replication, and a willingness to supply the data for inspection.

All of this works in an atmosphere that values reality above anyone's notions or their reputation.

Science and scholarship, even religous scholarship, have similar values in holding up the reality of the event or substance, dynamic or text, above anyone's pet theory.

Where that gets lost is when people aren't practicing exploration, observation and discovery.

In the absence of active personal observation and testing, peer review with others to correct or confirm our understanding, you just end up with a debate over opinions.

Science and scholarship lose accuracy and their way when opinions take precedent over the veracity of the core data. And that happens, almost inevitably, the further we get from first hand observation / data.

Observation, feedback, correction, all are important parts of getting a more accurate picture of reality.

Absent these even scientists can go astray.

But the philosophy of science is right. We just need to be sure we are submitting our own thinking to its practices. If we don't like the answer we don't say science is wrong. We take a closer look to find the flaws in our methods first.

And what makes that a happy event is when we see that there are no failures in science. Just discovery! There is simply learning more, and getting a more accurate picture. Love of exploration, love of observation, love of discovery, all are part and parcel of the dedicated scientist.

How can anyone love science ?

Just shows how little most of us know about love.

What sad lives we lead if a mere tool or mode of enquiry is proclaimed to be loved.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)


  • Welcome to the Church of the Churchless. If this is your first visit, click on "About this site--start here" in the Categories section below.
  • HinesSight
    Visit my other weblog, HinesSight, for a broader view of what's happening in the world of your Church unpastor, his wife, and dog.
  • BrianHines.com
    Take a look at my web site, which contains information about a subject of great interest to me: me.
  • Twitter with me
    Join Twitter and follow my tweets about whatever.
  • I Hate Church of the Churchless
    Can't stand this blog? Believe the guy behind it is an idiot? Rant away on our anti-site.