Here is a brief description of the status of institutional science today which is totally dependent upon consensus for its existence and survival. The creation of dogma is its a priori function to develop pillars of improvable Newtonian approximations and further represents the most dangerous enemy to mankind and civilization today. Scientific theory must be proven through demonstration and prediction and held accountable rather than the tenure of additive theory upon theory through peer review and hierarchal consensus. It is to be considered mechanical 'technology' development or Institutional science but never "science". Notwithstanding there lies deep within the forces of mankind in terms of integrity and courage, a re-emergent true science; a quiet and real science carried on the shoulders of the courageous giants of our times.
Wednesday, August 03, 2005
Of today's science (institutional); its characteristics and its state:
Science today is mechanistic, that is technology or of the machine and not of science; is purely quantitative, incapable of qualitative enquiry or analysis. This "science" is of mentality; dependent upon and protected by consensus, a priori.
"The modern age - The Age of the World Picture" as Heidegger terms it - represents not so much the ascendancy of science as that of technology and the machine." "Step-by-step" - granulations of ideas (approximations - ideations) taken from within encapsulated specializations where deductive reasoning meets criteria specified by that specialization without reference to other areas of specialization, and fixed dogmatically, selectively and preferentially by ruling paradigms (Kuhn), interests and agenda. An ad hoc static effect which negates the essence and principles of science and creates false foundations for scientific extension. That is, nescience structured in dogma and protected by true believing warrior priests in terms of peer-to-peer review, credentialization, tenure and active public relational debunking.
This institutional scientific approach of today therefore forces all future emergent science to be based or constrained or limited only in those preferred milestones of dogma and rigorously policed to this effect. Here is the error of our path - uncertainty & dogma (assumption), a priori. And, due to the peer-to-peer review process, only new discoveries made within the priestly and / or bureaucratic systems of approved institutionally qualification is permitted to be of further consideration. That is, context and methodology drawn down from the professorial elite, built upon by consensually accepted theory and proof by peer review only, with that consensus emanating only from within the inner core of the elite element of that specialist encapsulated temple; a self-serving feedback looping hierarchy.
Everything else is discarded until later 'discovered' through established protocol, opportunity (agenda) and ritual.
Mental usage of the dialectic in language today is duplicitous and adverse thereby allowing the creation of opposing ideas or uncertainty which creates sophistry due to the differences between intelligible responses to intellectual responses. Argument remains at superficial levels [reduced one level i.e. reductionism] of a quantitative nature and transmits only emotionally ill-formed (i.e. without value) preferences whereas arguments and research should find the core for the identification of the cause of the effect, the resistance, the function thereof and the original cause... which is normally found by the same process of the observed 'gesture'; that is the temporal signature. In the latter there is volume, value and significance besides being contextually oriented, all in a qualitative density of proportion and correspondence.
Obviously this approach of science today separates (and objectifies) and its usage enhances the borders of function and being, where no boundaries exist.
Static, reductionist, analytical, historical, obvious, known, definable, knowledge, necessary; intelligence needs a context or "thought needs support".
Mechanistic, fractured, ad hoc, ambiguous, approximate, representative, superficial, objective, layered, fragmented, priestly, hierarchal, bureaucratic, rite, imitation, rote, dogma, paradigmical.
And, by consensus, non-illuminative, sterile, fixed, irresponsible, idealistic, polarized to self engrandishment, ideological, lack of conviction, with power through fear, this science of destruction (refer to the Atomic bomb) remains constrained, secretive, demands obedience, revengeful, rationalistic, sophistic, duplicitous, ad hoc, subjective, limited, 'negative' a priori, contractive, and which starts with the part and develops towards the whole; is dialectic, consensual, with a reliance on words built on subjective and superficial objectivity without consideration for a comprehensive language - in grammar strategizes constructive rules of popular consent and thus being non synergistic nor relevant. That is to say, science today does not stimulate and therefore does not evoke comprehension. It lacks energization and thereby is not in accord with life itself. It demands protection.
Here can be verified a serious difference whereas modern static analytical science remains within the confines of complexity rather than proceeding onto simplicity by ridding itself with its fantasy of support mechanisms. There is no element of integrity and therefore due to the uncertainty of the dogma science, it carries the weight of its reductionist complexity, a priori. As a consequence synthesis is seriously disabled due to the preference for non-connected fragments which leads to the definition of a superficial ad hoc approach to physical enquiry. This a priori approach is symbiotic with the cerebral mechanism which a priori attunes itself to this discipline.
Science today relies on a system of references i.e. scales, e.g. time, speed of light, red shift, meter, absolute zero, etc. Its remains two dimensional (a picture, see above), with a priori non philosophical guidance, arrogant, with the 'Gods' (read: Universal Principles) replaced by men and 'cause and effect' replaced by determinism. The developed scientific state that everything is known [to science] when the facts suggests that little is known. Context from policy and agenda - abstracts that are uncoordinated, without philosophical depth of development and comprehension.
The analytical then reduces abstractions to a defined picture followed by a proliferation of disconnected facts - quantified 'objectifications' with relationship dependant upon linear equational logic. Or, a process of knowing a book by its cover or, superficiality - rote - imitation; that is, the process of establishing dogma; complexity of unknown origin.
On the other hand, the analogue first expands from the image inwardly into far reaching associations through evocation - digestive or processing through the extraction of the necessary elements. Both brain and stomachs are digestive processes. Simplicity is processed from complexity where that simplicity is richly qualitative as well as quantitative though volumetric density of knowing - analogy - the magnetic pinch effect - Birkeland Current (Biefield-Brown Effect) pinch effect. Everything is electrical that is, energetic, vital, impulsive. Drives are evocation from cause; that is, effect through resistance, with full possibility - man has probability wired in - Risk. The idea of science is not to invent the Universal and Parochial laws of physics (life), but to enquire as to their nature and the "facts" of physics are in abundance and need not be totally theorized ex nihilo.
Only such an approach is qualitative and allows an inner experience to be created as a complicit 'creation' with tacit (unique, experiential and innate) knowledge which has a value that can be subjected to inner qualification i.e. "measure". The objective of Man is 'individualism' 'becoming' 'experiential' 'dynamic' knowledge through the conscious identification of function or a continual state of the Verbe and to this end, science is the only "measure" that permits this 'becoming' or manifestation process.
That is, the ideologies or 'collectivism' are useful but are of a lower form of intelligence; an earlier milestone on the evolutionary scale. Ideologies have no place in intellect where accord with the Universal Principles (read: if preferred, the Gods') is innate.
That is to say consciousness is the concretization of qualitative experiential knowledge. Basically, we evolve only in terms of consciousness to live the functionality of resultant but emergent simplicity from dynamic complexity; vital and energized. A qualitative value where intellect drives intuition while intuition guides intellect and which is opposed to the current mentality of pure quantification.
Technology, which today's' "science" represents "Deus ex Machina" is a recursive arising from constraints which in most cases are ill-founded - being ill-considered - technology. Technology is a workaround; war is a technology as is terrorism a technology and so forth; a tool for profit and is not to be considered to be "science". Science is qualitative knowledge via complicit creation within the consciousness of man (or other intellectual life forms that have the capacity to self-organization); it is what men are to become in the universal evolutionary dynamic; time must never be considered as an absolute or anything more than relationships in terms of the Pythagorean geometrie of organizations surrounding structure.
That is, clearly, "Science" today is consensual and it needs protection as it cannot stand unchallenged by itself.
