8 My position regarding science and non-science
My own level of education
I did not study at a university. This was by choice. When having finished the equivalent of High School in my country, my physics teacher tried to persuade me achieve one higher level at that school and study physics at a university. I had already registered for an education as social worker. He was slightly disappointed, but understood my decision was made.
I made this decision because I wanted to learn how to teach people how to help themselves.
Another reason was that I was, from a young age, reading books meant for students at universities. My father was a librarian at a technical university, and I was ill for a long time when I was 10 years old. It took me more time than the real students and I did not receive personal guidance from teachers the way the real students had. After this period of social isolation, I continued my formal education.
After primary school I noticed that my mind had tasted the university level of information regarding the basic knowledge at school and was hungry for more brain-food. At home I started reading books and magazines providing me a more detailed context regarding the topics at school. My father allowed me to use his private library and bought books for me as bridge between my formal education and my self-learning education. If I did not understand something, I asked people who did finish a study at a university to explain things to me. Some were my teachers at school, others I met in private situations. When studying at High School and later within the education to become a social worker, many of my teachers had a university background.
In my social life I was close to people from all kinds of educational levels. I noticed the extreme differences in defining reality. Each level of education used its own standard definitions to describe what was real and what was not. This led to endless useless discussions between them. It was more about everyone trying to proof they had the only truth regarding the subject of that discussion, rather than about the subject itself.
The highly educated people said that the world of books and experiments in laboratory conditions was real and quoting other books was their way of proving it was the truth.
The less educated people claimed books were not reality itself but were only words regarding reality. They made their choices based upon what they could see for themselves in a world you can touch.
From my point of view, both were right and wrong, but I was too young and inexperienced to guide both extremes together in a balance creative dialogue.
During the 50 years that followed, I learned every day from people belonging to a wide variety of levels of education and professions.
I do not claim to be a scientist. I lack the training in generally agreed scientific methods and the in-depth information about the topics I publish. But I understand enough to build bridges between all kinds of people by means of my words and images.
The difference between science and non-science.
Before telling you where I see myself in this context, I quote Wikipedia. This is a source of information often regarded unreliable by many scientists. I see Wikipedia as just a simplified bridge between their world of scientific ideas and the world of those that are only interested in the general context or summary of those ideas.
Truth in our global society, is not the same for scientists and non-scientists. The interaction between these groups is where the world we can touch is created.
Wikipedia about scientist:
A scientist is someone who conducts scientific research to advance knowledge in an area of interest.
In classical antiquity, there was no ancient analogy of a modern scientist. Instead, philosophers engaged in the philosophical study of nature called natural philosophy, a precursor of natural science. It was not until the 19th century that the term scientist came into regular use after it was coined by the theologian, philosopher, and historian of science William Whewell in 1833.
In modern times, many scientists have advanced degrees in an area of science and pursue careers in various sectors of the economy such as academia, industry, government, and non-profit environments. (Wikipedia)
Wikipedia about non-science:
Non-science is an area of study that is not scientific, especially one that is not a natural science or a social science that is an object of scientific inquiry. In this model, history, art, and religion are all examples of non-sciences.
Since the 17th century, some writers have used the word science to exclude some areas of studies, such as the arts and the liberal arts. The word non-science, to describe non-scientific academic disciplines, was first used in the middle of the 19th century.
In some cases, it can be difficult to identify exact boundaries between science and non-science. The demarcation problem is the study of the difficulties in determining whether certain fields of study, near the boundaries of science and non-science, should be considered as one or the other. No single test has yet been devised that can clearly separate science from non-science, but some factors, taken as a whole and evaluated over time, are commonly used. In the view of Thomas Kuhn, these factors include the desire of scientists to investigate a question as if it were a puzzle. Kuhn’s view of science is also focused on the process of scientific inquiry, rather than the result.
Boundary-work is the process of advocating for a desired outcome in the process of classifying fields of study that are near the borders. The rewards associated with winning a particular classification suggest that the boundary between science and non-science is socially constructed and ideologically motivated rather than representing a stark natural difference between science and non-science. The belief that scientific knowledge (e.g., biology) is more valuable than other forms of knowledge (e.g., ethics) is called scientism. (Wikipedia)
My definition of the truth-concept
“The Truth” is the set of subjective standards people use to control their subjective perception of reality.
Therefore an “Objective Truth” or reality cannot exist.
To be able to communicate with each other people, use “Axiom’s,” which are assumptions of a truth without further possible practical or rational proof at that moment in that context.
These “Axioms” are agreed on after negotiation and used if a better alternative or theoretical/practical proof is not found yet.
This definition leaves room for defining “a truth” within each group of people having the need for “a truth.”
This truth enables them to communicate with each other in the context of creating their part of the world we can touch, because of their cooperation as a group, as a collective.
This way they create a shared language, a shared set of words and its interpretation.
Without this system, they could not achieve anything more than arguing about the definitions of truth.
It is good that this diversity of truth concepts exists. It makes it possible that each of these groups provide the Homo Sapiens, as an evolving species, with a diversity in ideas, resulting in visible goods and services. In other words, sets of definitions of truths agreed upon in groups of people, which are different in one group compared to another, are the basis of successful surviving and evolution of our species by means of a diversity-based economy and global society.
How I see my role in our complex society in this context.
My approach of knowledge is based on an integration of four ways to look at every topic I try to understand. It is like being in a museum of art and wanting to understand and feel the meaning of a 3-dimensional object made by an artist. I walk around it and can study it from the north, south, east, and west. This symbolic concept, translated to gaining knowledge and empathy, leads me to the four levels of development as described by Spinoza: Material, emotional, rational, and spiritual. Each of these four levels are like the steps on a staircase towards the next level of understanding, the next floor in my building of thoughts. This is my never-ending process of learning, not limited to my present life in this body (see the chapter regarding Modular Reincarnation). This 4-fold concept includes the scientific rational approach but is not limited to only that approach. Through the process of synthesis, I solve the contradictions within the topic I study at every level of these four ways. By doing so, I reach the next floor of the building of knowledge and empathy in my mind.
I experience scientists as my (remote) teachers. I do understand the risk of not being guided by them like a student in the context of a school or university. But there is an advantage for me: I can choose what, when and how I study. This allows me to stay independent from any mainstream dominating set of ideas. These ideas are important and useful within the space-time coordinates these scientists can touch. It is their duty to focus on their part of the long linear timeline of all knowledge and empathy.
Science as we know it now, is not what it was a few centuries ago. It will also not be the same a few centuries ahead in time. They are the tools of evolution to study past, present and possible futures regarding the topic(s) of their local and global society. That is the (part of) the world they can touch within the set of space-time coordinates their mortal bodies live.
An important group of non-scientists are the teachers that focus on the world we can not touch: The realm of spirituality. Faith and intuition are important and useful regarding the 5th and higher dimensions. The group of non-scientists that can experience, study and explain these dimensions are sometimes a member of a religion, but most are independent individuals. They think outside the boxed paradigms of the mandate, scientists and religious leaders have within their local and global society. Spiritual teachers cannot be leaders of their local and global society. They are not above other people, but next to them. They are not leaders, but teachers. It is their duty to focus on the eternal and infinite cyclic time regarding all knowledge and empathy. As teachers they need the scientists to learn the words, sounds, images and objects they can touch with their mortal bodies, they need to teach others regarding spiritual topics.
In this mortal life, scientists and non-scientists are my teachers. They guide my merging linear time and cyclic time, linear logical reasoning and circular associating reasoning. Together they prepared me, and many other mortals, to become builders of bridges between:
- scientists and non-scientists
- local and global society
- individuals and organisations
- science and religion
- this Universe and the Omniverse
- mortals and infinite and eternal entities
- physical, emotional, rational and spiritual layers of knowledge and empathy
How I integrate all my sources of knowledge and empathy (as non-scientist).
My reasoning on any topic begins with collecting information (ideas and experiences) from all sources available to me. For example: science, social media, people I meet, books, movies, television, and internet-sites.
Then I try to imagine these ideas and experiences as a group of islands in an imaginary ocean. The group of islands bear the name of the topic. Each island represents a source of information within that topic.
The next step in this thought-experiment is to visualize bridges between the islands. On both ends of each bridge, I write on the road words that express the first step towards the other end of the bridge.
Word after word, the two separate ways of describing cause and effect of the topic grow nearer to each other. At the middle of the bridge, I visualize the representatives of both islands to shake hands and start a conversation. This conversation, I translate into a set of keywords I can use later.
This process, I repeat on each bridge between one island and another island. Since each island needs to be connected to all the other islands, I visualize the islands as a circle shaped lagoon (including palm trees and beaches).
In a simplified version it looks like this:
The coloured triangles are the ideas that emerge in my mind as connections between all those sources of information. They are connections between the sets of keywords I discovered while listening to the imaginary conversation at the middle of each bridge.
The next phase is that I imagine telling somebody about this adventure in my mind. I imagine conversations with real people regarding the adventures in my mind.
The next step is sharing my ideas with people I meet in the world I can touch. Their feedback helps me to improve:
– The level of my knowledge and empathy regarding that topic.
– The level of teaching people I meet regarding that topic.
The next phase is to create texts and images, which I share with a few people. They give me the feedback I need to upgrade my knowledge and empathy to the next level regarding that topic.
The last phase is creating and publishing that topic.