Truth, Reality, Abstraction and Metaphor
Truth is abstraction and reality is metaphor. Both occupy consciousness and define the split between heaven and earth, the sciences and the humanities, the holy and the profane, and, to some, nonsense and sense. There are sanctioned abstractions, and there are abstract concepts which rely on abstract experience for their meaning. Mathematics is a tool for manufacturing the abstract causes and effects which align with the abstract concept. Truth is always internally consistent, and because consciousness contains the whole universe, external contradictions can be discarded as false. We all know this, but we choose to believe in truth because it's easier than doubt, skepticism, curiosity, and the shame that comes with being a social irritant.
Science, say its true believers, is self-correcting. But if we take the long view, so is every religion. Despite the claims of fundamentalists, every religion adapts to its time and evolves along with the environment which it domesticates to conform to its abstract utopia. Science is as rigidly ideological as anything we still refer to as religion, because science is the most recent distillation of the very same monotheism that gave legitimacy to the first Nation States. Overturning a long-established theory with incontrovertible evidence is hard enough. But scientific models are defended as vehemently as any State religion. The challenge, though as abstract and harmless as a video game, is received as a threat to the whole universe. Science claims to hold falsifiability as an essential attribute of any model it holds to be true. But truth, by definition, can't be falsified, and scientific world views are as obstinately preserved as any world view held by religious doctrine or political ideology.
That's changing, I think, but so long as science remains tied to monotheism, and indoctrinates believers rather than nurtures skeptics, it will remain a divisive and domesticating force that leads to its own annihilation.
Science, say its true believers, is self-correcting. But if we take the long view, so is every religion. Despite the claims of fundamentalists, every religion adapts to its time and evolves along with the environment which it domesticates to conform to its abstract utopia. Science is as rigidly ideological as anything we still refer to as religion, because science is the most recent distillation of the very same monotheism that gave legitimacy to the first Nation States. Overturning a long-established theory with incontrovertible evidence is hard enough. But scientific models are defended as vehemently as any State religion. The challenge, though as abstract and harmless as a video game, is received as a threat to the whole universe. Science claims to hold falsifiability as an essential attribute of any model it holds to be true. But truth, by definition, can't be falsified, and scientific world views are as obstinately preserved as any world view held by religious doctrine or political ideology.
That's changing, I think, but so long as science remains tied to monotheism, and indoctrinates believers rather than nurtures skeptics, it will remain a divisive and domesticating force that leads to its own annihilation.
Comments