Re: Physicists Disagree Over *Meaning* ! ( what Progress is all about)?

--- In [email protected], Brett Hall <brhalluk@...> wrote:
>
> On 20/02/2013, at 7:21, "JAG" <jaguarnight2012@...> wrote:
> 
> > Physicists Disagree Over *Meaning* of Quantum Mechanics, (Poll Shows)
> > 
> > http://www.livescience.com/26444-quantum-mechanics-physicists-poll.html
> > 
> Do you think that scientific matters should be adjudicated by voting? What if we took a vote about, say, the evolution of life? Holding such a poll, in some places, would make the Earth 6000 years old. Should we vote on the efficacy of homeopathic remedies? Some doctors may then be required to prescribe them.

Voting and polls can only tell us what people think/beleive about something, in any given time, and in this case, this voting had to do about the meaning of QM. Simple as that but yes, it can get more complicated.


> > 
> > A Snapshot of Foundational *Attitudes* Toward Quantum Mechanics
> > 
> > http://arxiv.org/abs/1301.1069
> > 
> > Can we see now, why EVERYTHING depends on attitude/meaning/justification/explanation?
> > 
> > Can we see now that we can NOT have an *objective* SCIENCE since all method amd measurements are done and evaluated by *subjective* processes/experiences (in short, by ourselves)?
> > 
> Do you distinguish between the epistemological objective/subjective distinction and the ontological one?
> 
> Science is about objects, for the most part. There doesn't seem to be much subjective science.

It is true in this 'conditional' and exclusive sense.
but, the Universe is made of Energy. Objects are just one of the 'forms' of energy. Human beings are *sentient* beings, with Consciousness, beliefs, values, spirituality and the need to KNOW and BELIEVE in something, thus the need for meaning...
and then, we do need to have tangible results....

Thus, an all-inclusive-consclusive-objective Science, should be more than the mere study of objects and materials -something more than the production/consumption of materials goods (technology) and ego roles (in the form of a scientifc authority).
 
Otherwise, Science should NOT claim exclusivity in Knowledge and superiority in method. 

After all, only results can be the criteria of how usuful and succesful Science and the scienfic method could be. 


> On the other hand, that the Earth is not 6000 years old is not the result of mere parochial bias. It is simply the case given our best understanding of the world.
> 
> If there is no epistemic objectivity to science, then are all opinions equally valid? If so...how does progress happen? Why do we have iPhones now and none 2000 years ago? 

There is some epistemic objectivity, conditionally and always specific
to the issue/situation in question. I am theory-oriented so, evetything goes back to that. That's why i believe that QM is not about just science/scientific events but about metaphysics and Meta-theory in itself! ;)

Now, the word PROGRESS is kinda difficult and we have to be VERY careful with a few things.

What is the aim of Science? isn't the pursuit of Truth, ontologically -and Cosmologically speaking.

Technology is the product of Science but that's by far what Progress really means -and what Progress should be all about. 

Progress in what? 

Yes we do have the technology to make iphones etc. but
do we really live in a better world bc of tehnology? is our life better bc of the iphones and all the rest marvels of Technology?

Don't take me wrong here, i mot nihilistic, and i do love my toys too, but a serious Science should provide REAL solutions to REAL problems. 

While I am not gonna get into any environmental/social/theologiocal issues here, (yes, they do exist) i am gonna ask you:

Do you beleieve that Science (as is now) is in the service of Humanity? If not, i will argue that we have not made any great Progress! (with the wider meaning of Progress) ;)

And going beyond some luxuries and technological miracles, do you think that science and technology are in the 'right' direction? (again, in terms of Progress in human affairs and civil-ization)

Look around you, people all over the world are still @ war with themselves and each other. Technology does provide some solutions -to very problems we create, but that's different than Progress! 

Sure, Prozac and Viagra could help one cope with life and still able to be functional and do certain things, but is that all that Science and Technology can do?

Science also has an ego-ccentric/anthropocentric character, thus, becomes limited -and cursed to these very same variables. 

I will accept a few things but i can not accept Science's claim for exlusivity and superiority in knowledge and method of all human and cosmic affairs.

The gift of self-reflection (beyond some great inventions, isn't that the root of all marvels in human evolution and science and technology?) becomes a curse when we can not *justify* our aims and ways and goals. It becomes the problem and not the solution. thus, the need for 'complementation' in theories and methods....

On the other hand, highly-programmed animals don't have certain *existential* and perceptual and even ethical problems;  the Spider's way to make its web is equally and superbly 'scientific' but by far more advanced in other ways -it does not purposely and recklessly destroy its environment and itself; its purpose is to kill for survival -not for luxury or bc of bad politics, or bc repressed insticts and pathological ideologies. My cat does not need to *think*; she knows things *directly*; she is connected with the Universal in ways we, regardless our technology, have not even started to imagine! 

so from that perspective, while technologically advanced, the human race is kinda...far behind in some of the most important aspects that would ensure the continuationa and well-being of our species ;)
That is what Progress should be all about! ;)

What we need is not just information and knowledge but the necessary *wisdom* and *values* to ensure that the fruits of any scientific/technological progress are in the service of Humanity and in line with Cosmological/Energetic events. 

I won't speak about Theological theories/events, but it seems to me that the quest for Knowlewdge and Truth in cosmic events, is also a quest for Divine Realization and Identification..... 

That's where the concept of *meaning* becomes of paramount value in all affairs -including scientifc affairs.
That's also where QM could serve the needs of Science and Humanity.

> 
> Or have we discovered that some theories are, objectively speaking, better than others? Indeed, have we, objectively, shown some to be false?

Yes, and that is Progress, indeed.

> > 
> > Can we see and recognize now the need for a *complementary* theory/science? is it possible?
> > 
> What does "complementary" mean? Can it mean something other than "contradictory"?
> > 
> > what are the implictions of such theory/endeavor?
> > 
> Relativism.
> > 
> > ;)
> > 
> > 
> :D
> 
"Complimentary" for me implies and negates some degree of Wholism and Unity; some better Understanding (of the process ) and then some productive Actualization/Realization (of genetic/energetic potential).

Finally, i think that PROGRESS is all about Scientific Creativity and Philosophical Inspiration (to carry out succesfully the above tasks) but i see those two as ONE. ;)


"No entity without identity." 
-W. V. Quine