During the 2020 lockdowns, the phenomenon of ‘scientism’ was notable. I have talked about this a lot in the blog, but it is worth revisiting yet again because as we move into a more technological future, such as with Artificial Intelligence (AI) and energy transitioning, it is critical for us to skeptically think about how we understand science in our lives (just click on scientism as a search term when viewing older posts).
When I talk about scientism during the lockdowns, what came out was the aggressive polarization of what was considered the correct science about C-19, with a mainstream narrative dominating several alternative interpretations that were actively excluded. One of the main themes that was excluded was the use of evidence based medical science in favor of a hierarchical and corporate perspectives.
We are at a time when science backed by big money dominates true philosophical scientific understanding. The great illusion that drives modern scientific research is that it is completely objective and value free because of the use of true experimental protocols. Subjectivity is reserved for the ‘soft’ sciences where intensive non-experimental or quasi-research protocols have been developed to cope with the inherent problems of this kind of research (e.g. education, sociology, anthropology, etc.) (see post Reality Check on Research {March 2018} for more discussion about this).
The other great illusion is that science is the great objective authority of truth. In the western world at least, the arbitrator of truth until the Renaissance was the ‘Church.’ If the church sanctioned information it was deemed true, if not, you could be executed as a heretic (think Spanish Inquisition). As such for many centuries, being an alchemist (early scientist) was a risky lifestyle if any work disagreed with the church’s orthodoxy. The Muslim world was different in that it valued scientific thinking alongside its religious views. I read a historic perspective of the dark ages that claimed if the moors had won the Battle of Covadonga (722), we might have been technologically as advanced as today by the 1700s (!?).
At the beginning of the renaissance, a scientific worldview differentiated from the Church’s influence on truth and started to flourish as a separate worldview. Indeed, the Council of Trent in Bologna (1545-1563) set up the framework for separation of religious spirituality and science, with the consequent decades-centuries long decline of philosophy and sociology as direct components of a scientific education. The idea that science was value-free set up a mindset that science, any-science, was ‘good’ regardless of its consequences. The idea that ‘just because we could, we should’ became acceptable. A good example of this was brought home to me recently as I re-watched the films ‘Jurassic Park’ and ‘Jurassic Park: Dominion’ and how the money-making idea of recreating dinosaurs as a Disney-like tourist attraction backfired because of the lack of philosophical consideration of potential (chaotic) consequences with high level genetic technology. Interestingly, in those films the high-level scientific technology that was meant to maintain control was always thwarted by human failings and fear (e.g., greed and ignorance).
This is as true in all modern aspects of our modern global society. For example, scientists just like politicians get trapped in their own problematic worldview. A wonderful line from the 1981 film “My Dinner with Andre says it nicely: “They’ve built their own prison, so they exist in a state of schizophrenia. They’re both guards and prisoners and as a result they no longer have, having been lobotomized, the capacity to leave the prison they’ve made, or to even see it as a prison.”
Interestingly, one of big modern problems is ‘Hope.’ This is because, too often, hope is always rooted in an unknown future. Real change is hard for people to do because of attachment to current systems. Hope can cause people to accept what they do not want as they just continue to dream of what could be instead of living it. When people are locked in survival mode, they hope of escape, but maintain their focus on root needs instead of trying to live self-actualized ones. “You have to understand. Most people are not ready to be unplugged. And many of them are so inured and so hopelessly dependent on the system that they will fight to protect it” Morpheus, The Matrix.
Living within a scientism paradigm has been the basis of our materialistic-consumer world. Yet, with so many polarizing issues today based on a misplaced trust of science as an absolute authority, means we focus on material, often debauched, lives that have lost track of what makes life worth living. “You are not here merely to make a living. You are here in order to enable the world to live more amply, with greater vision, with a finer spirit of hope and achievement. You are here to enrich the world, and you impoverish yourself if you forget the errand” Woodrow Wilson.
In the past few decades, this scientific worldview has permeated our mainstream educational systems such that they are focused on ‘facts’ alone and increasingly devoid of values. The supposed teachers of values within religious systems have also polarized with fundamentalism and more tolerant perspectives being at odds with each other. By handing off discussion of values from philosophical to fundamentalist teachers separated from science we create more schisms within society. We need to remember that true science is meant to be always skeptical and ready to change as new information is discovered. It is never static and known-truths, only what we currently understand and which can change anytime. While that may have been somewhat the case since the renaissance, it lost it way at the start of the industrial revolution as industry created demand for technology that made material goods a central focus.
“Educating the mind without educating the heart is no education at all” Aristotle.
Educating only the mind only with predefined facts and figures means we develop only cognition (intellect) in service of a material focus, e.g., to get the right job and lifestyle. In the last few decades, the very notion of imparting values from education has come under attack. Yes, educating values has been the big bugbear of recent decades and is also the problem of propaganda. But the very point of an enlightened education is independent thinking, skepticism, rationalism, and greater understanding of world cosmology, such that ‘educating the heart’ develops empathy, compassion, respect for diversity and human dignity, love, respect for the law of land, and as I covered in the last post, Wisdom (connect with innate intelligence).
Public education has been around since the mid-1500s (e.g., German Duchy Württemberg), but only since the early 1800s did it become more widespread. In part 1 of this current series (see link) I use ideas from Ken Richardson about the problem of modern compulsory public education. It was designed for the industrial age, primarily to ‘train’ workers for the new industrial systems, with kids being taught in ‘batches of similar age’ just like an industrial process. Consequently, it wasn’t used to enlighten the educated so much as train and indoctrinate them into hierarchical social norms and expectations, and continues as such today. This has consequently also has manifested itself in the form of hate crimes, terrorism, crimes against humanity, etc. as part of a global plan to keep us separated.
If we are to move way from this utilitarian approach then we must begin education of the both the mind from a broad enlightened framework, and the much-neglected education of the heart for broad spiritual values. This is important so that we create sovereign thinkers that not only have a broad range of knowledge in which they can discern truth for themselves. But also to develop their innate talents without restrictions, and intelligently apply innate wisdom to solving issues and problems without having to retreat to camps of thinking that restrict creativity.
Now that is all fine and grand for future generations, but we are at a major transition point where wise decisions need to be made now if we are to move into a sustainable world where we thrive and not just survive. It therefore become incumbent on the many of us who already have learned to think from the heart to lead the way. As the Matrix quote in the seventh paragraph above emphasizes, a great many people are scared to change, so those of us ready for the transition will need to work from the heart to guide and show them that a great future where we all thrive is not only possible but doable! And that first step we all can make is to insist that we apply wisdom to all decisions that pertain to our current and future technologies, and to do it without the global hierarchies getting in the way.
To Be Continued …………
0 Comments