Help
Sign In
a new kind of science
June 2009 
ALL science and all scientists
Michael
Since the beginning of mankind's ponderings on the "nature of all things universal" - ALL science and all scientists have ultimately been proved to be wrong in either some major or minor way. The theory of the Universe as perceived by Ptolemy gave way to that of Copernicus, Copernicus to Kepler and Kepler to Hawking & Penrose.
Although the beauty about Andrew Cohen's "What is enlightenment" magazine-initiative is that it brings together such a wide diversity of knowledge & opinion - acquired & established by the very broadest spectrum of specialist practitioners - such that articles about Zaadz.com and A New Dawn for Cosmology can be published in the same edition - there is a tendency to encourage us to seek & get involved with more and more about less and less.
This is exemplified by the latest edition which highlights Ken Wilber's view's on God's Next Move - as Ken himself acknowledges Ray Kurzweil's views on the singularity etc. - against a background of discussion between Ray Kurzweil - as a scientist - and Stephen Woolfram - as a mathematician - about Stephen Woolfram's book "A New Kind of Science".
In view of our ever increasing need to consider - and accept - what changes when change changes? - Einstein's observation that - we cannot solve problems at the same level of thinking at which we created them - stills seems most appropriate - but should we not, equally, be seeking less and less about more and more?
In the same way that Spinoza inspired confidence in Leibnitz to publish his theories, as a result of their discussions about the I-Ching - we should utilise the Zaadz ‘like-minded collective' to promote a greater collective spiritual understanding of what needs to happen to change the world!
.
Access: Public
I agree with you Michael sort of… in my view… science has not been proven wrong because there is no right and wrong with models of reality. It is a question of degree of fit. The theories now fit better… or has reality moved? That is the question. I like that about seeking less and less about more and more. That is certainly the direction to go in my opinion. Great post :-)
less and less about more and more
Thanks for that link, Michael! I've been trying to find that thread since having had to sign off the day I asked for your friendship!
Could it be even contemplated, that the organisation which gave us the internet, be now about to let the ”BIG PICTURE GENIE out of the BIG PICTURE BOTTLE” ???
… OR that the idea that the Universe has been around ‘forever’ didn’t, in fact, start at the Big Bang, as suggested by Brian Cox, and that Stepehen Hawking and Dr. Michio Kaku are among those discussing the possibility of travelling close to the speed of light and how that would change the way we experience TIME.
Whose science IS IT anyway? asks Michael Brooks in his article; re-iterating Jose Ortega’s insight that the majority of scientists are - ”shut up in the narrow cell of their laboratory, like the bee in the cell of its hive” and felt that, every now and then, scientists should look at the cultural value placed on science, and consider
“how society and the heart of man are to be organised in order that there may continue to be [scientific] investigators”.
“The signs of environmentalism’s death are all around us: we speak in terms of technical policies, NOT vision and values; we propose 20th-century solutions to 21st-century problems; we are failing to attract young people, the physical embodiment of the future, to our cause; we’re failing to attract the disenfranchised, the disempowered, the dispossessed and the disengaged; we treat our mental categories, ourselves and other elements of nature as THINGS; most of all, environmentalism IS no longer capable of generating the power it needs to deal with the world’s most serious ecological problems.”
Adam Werbach, 2004
Space storm alert: 90 seconds from catastrophe - says the US National Academy of Sciences (NAS), in its latest report about the threat of Solar Storms and the scientific community declare, after its Copenhagen emergency meeting, that …
” We need another kind of scientist to save the world ”
SCIENCE and politics make uncomfortable bedfellows.
Rarely is this more true than in the case of climate change, where it is now
time for emergency counselling. One point repeatedly made at last week's climate change congress in Copenhagen was that formulating an action plan to curb climate change is NOT the job of scientists.
LET THE NEW stratified realities ROLL ON
“Science, like theology, reveals transcendent truths about a changing world.
The best scientists are moral individuals whose business is to seek the truth.
Corruption of this process undermines not just democracy but civilization itself.”
Robert Kennedy Jr, 2004
Levels of intelligence WILL UNDOUBTEDLY EVOLVE throughout the 21st Century, which will prove that ”Evolution as a spiritual process” IS a SCIENTIFIC TRUTH.
… JUST as Stephen Wolfram prepares to launch his Wolfram Alpha computational search engine as complementary to Google rather than in competition.
The conscious delegation of decision making to
computers is the next phase of social evolution