Jeremy Thomas 1/2 às 22:57 -- Reductionism and Complacency

Jeremy Thomas

1/2

Reductionism and Complacency

A lot of modern scientific thinking is based in reductionism, in the idea that complex phenomena can always be "reduced" or explained from known or assumed assumptions.

But some results in the foundation of Mathematics had shown that this approach had intrinsic limitations in the sense that any area of reality that we may try to model will always have "anomalies", or properties/phenomena that can not be reduced to any given preexisting set of assumptions or hyphotesis, in other words: the given model will always be incomplete, it will be unable to describe fully reality.

The so called theories of everything are just a dream that never will be reached.

But this reductionist mentality had lead to complacency and a generalized debunking mentality.

Known authorities in a given field frequently abuse their position to impose their views. The Lavoisier case of denying the reality of meteorities is a documented one showing how authority can be abused, but that obviously is not an issolated case.

This debunking mentality, i.e. complacency, assume that we can dismiss "anomalies" out of hand because these anomalies will have sooner or later an explanation, and by "anomalies" here I refer to any fact that appears to contradict stablished theories or paradigms.

That complacency is what lead Lavoisier to deny the reality of meteorites and that complacency is the one that had lead many to deny the reality of autonomous anomalous flying objects today.

It is a pathological/endemic attitude in academic circles and one that shows clearly how detached from reality can become the people that are supposedly to be more attuned to it.

GostoMostrar mais reações

Comentar

Vista por 36

3Rob Freeman, Alan Bumac e Franny Hudson

Comentários

Jeremy Thomas The shortcomings of Official Science regarding the UFO dilemma had been documented widely, even by scientists themselves as was the case with James E. McDonald in his paper of 1967: Science in Default,http://puhep1.princeton.edu/.../JEMc.../mcdonald_aaas_69.pdf

Still today clearly science is missing in this area of interest.

But scientists had also documented the growing systemic problems in science in general, for example, quote:

"The nature of scientific activity has changed dramatically over the last half century, and the objectivity and rigorous search for evidence that once defined it are being abandoned. Increasingly, this text argues, dogma has taken the place of authentic science."

Dogmatism in Science and Medicine.

Author: Henry H. Bauer 

http://www.mcfarlandbooks.com/book-2.php...

More examples of "Closeminded Science" can be found in this link:http://amasci.com/weird/wclose.html

But the reality of anomalies is the clearest example showing a deep systemic problem in modern academic thinking, their long held incapacity to recognize this reality clearly show that, if amateurs with very limited resources can document frequently these manifestations how can we explain that people with unlimited resources are still unaware or denying it??

https://www.reddit.com/.../reductionism_complacency_and.../

Gosto · Responder · 2/2 às 14:19