The hallmark of science is its willingness to discard outmoded
theories when a better, more explanatory model comes along. But today,
science practices this principle only within the paradigm of
materialism. By this term I mean a model of the universe based upon the
assumption that matter came before mind, that the universe and all
living things are nothing but particles in motion, and that the world we
see, from the tips of our fingers to the farthest galaxy, exists independently of the mind and operates beyond its control.
This
materialistic model brings us the Big Bang theory, dark matter, dark
energy, reductive materialism, and the search for the "God" particle in
atom smashers and for the origin of life in test tubes.
Modern
scientists use the model of materialism because they believe it is
necessary to practice science. For example, in a classic article on
quantum physics, entitled, "Can Quantum-Mechanical Description of
Physical Reality Be Considered Complete?" the authors, Albert Einstein,
Boris Podolsky, and Nathan Rosen, write, "Any serious consideration of a
physical theory must take into account the distinction between the objective reality, which is independent of any theory, and the physical concepts with which the theory operates."
The late Ernst Mayr, one of history's leading biologists, expressed the subject this way:
"Despite
the openness of science to new facts and hypotheses, it must be said
that virtually all scientists-somewhat like theologians-bring a set of
what we call "first principles" with them to the study of the natural
world. One of these axiomatic assumptions is that there is real world independent of human perceptions.
This might be called the principle of objectivity (as opposed to
subjectivity) or common-sense realism. This does not mean that
individual scientists are always "objective" or even that objectivity
among human beings is possible in any absolute sense. What it does mean
is that an objective world exists outside of the influence of
subjective perception. Most scientists-though not all-believe in this
axiom."
Even though the objective-world model is a popular
viewpoint -- since everyone wants there to be a "real world independent
of human perceptions" -- it does suffer from one notable flaw: no one
has ever shown it is either true or necessary. Indeed, no one has
shown that science cannot be practiced within a different conceptual
model. If there is one criticism modern scientists deserve is that they
have convinced the public at large that only within the materialistic
model is the practice of science possible; using any other approach,
they announce, veers off the road into unscientific religious dogma and
new-age hocus-pocus.
No comments:
Post a Comment