From: Tagi@cup.portal.com (Tagi Mordred Nagashiva)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Traditions, Worldviews and the History of Science
Date: Fri,  2 Oct 92 15:31:18 PDT
Organization: The Portal System (TM)

9210.02 e.v.


---------------------------------------------------------------

TRADITIONS, WORLDVIEWS AND THE HISTORY OF SCIENCE

By Thyagi NagaSiva
-------------------------------

Recently there has been much focus on the relationship among
scientific and religious social groups for the purposes of 
arriving at creative solutions to world events.  

Often such factors as 'the Scientific Method' and 'Revelation' 
are contrasted as differing sources of knowledge.  Often the
nature of experience itself is questioned in order to understand
how such disparate ideas have come to be contrasted.  Even more
often are 'knowledge' and 'truth' compared and evaluated based
on preferred authorities.

What follows is a model in which both Religion and Science can be
related to social groups and lingual thought-constructs.  The means 
of acquiring knowledge is analyzed and suggestions to resolve the 
continuing conflict is offered.


1) Religion and Revelation

A religion is a social construct which focusses on images, ideas or 
forms to give it identity and coherence.  Religious traditions as a 
whole tend to address personal aspects of day-to-day living and 
give a member orientation and support.  Small or new religions may be 
associated with certain social groups, yet when fragmented over 
time they become large complexes with conflicting ideas and values.

Some religions derive their data from a personal process called 
'Revelation'.  This involves the focus upon certain valued artifacts 
(books, statues, pictures, etc.) resulting in disclosure of the 
deepest teachings of a tradition.  

Revelation is often accepted as a method of ascertaining certain 
truths about personal and/or social experience.  Some social groups 
form the basis of their identity around books and other artwork 
which has resulted from this process.


2) Science and the Scientific Method

Science is a social construct which focusses on the conceptual 
ideas of 'cause and effect', 'observation' and 'repeatability'.  
It uses an intellectual tool called 'the Scientific Method' to 
establish a correlation between experience and observable 'facts'.

The Scientific Method is a system of learning.  It is a tool with 
which one may construct models to use in the navigation of experience.  
These models are called 'worldviews'.  They are internally 
consistent lingual-systems which function much the way a map does 
for our orientation and enjoyment.

The Method consists of hypothesis, experiment and analysis.  The 
hypothesis largely involves the imagination of new POSSIBLE data.  
Experiment is the process of testing that data to see if it fits 
within the worldview.  Analysis is the consolidation of the data 
within our worldview or the creation of a NEW worldview which 
comprehends data contrary to the original.

In Science there are no absolute assumptions.  'Facts' are simply 
tentative assumptions which function in the context of our 
lives.   'Knowledge' is the consistent system of data which 
we are able to derive within a particular worldview.   The Scientific 
Method is a means to generate such data.  Its use results in cohesive
frameworks of knowledge that correspond to our experience.


3) Objectivity

The 'realm of objects' is what we perceive when we direct our 
awareness outward from our bodies.  It is what is commonly called 
the 'material realm'.  This is the arena in which Science has secured 
a firm foothold.  Machines are used to measure and detect 
environmental qualities or fluctuations and translate this 
data into useful lingual constructs with the aid of a numerical 
worldview called 'mathematics'.  

This realm includes those aspects of our experience which relate 
to 'exterior' nouns and verbs such as 'apple', 'balloon' and 'crawl'.  
It is also the focus of more abstract language which relates to 
ideas that associate aspects of objective experience, such as 
'number', 'color' and 'shape'.  Whatever we may sense outwardly 
can be included in the realm of objects.

Science's first competition with other social constructs (also 
referred to as 'traditions') was in the objective realm.  Other 
traditions in Western society gradually relinquished their 
description of the world of objects as the value of 
measurement and a consensus-worldview began to be popularly 
supported.

The scientific began to be associated with the objective and 
'objectivity' began to be equated with 'knowledge'.  The scientific 
tradition was largely stymied in the realm of the subject due to 
the worldviews of those within it who also adhered to competing 
traditions.   As long as Science only delves into the 
objective realm, so it seldom directly conflicts with 
other traditions on issues which affect social stability.


4) Subjectivity

The 'realm of the subject' is what we perceive when we direct 
our attention inward, toward our body and its experience.  It is 
called many things, due to the conflict which groups have in 
referring to it.  By Western religious groups it is most often called the 
'spiritual realm'.   It is most directly referred to through the use
of analogy, parable or myth.

This realm includes those aspects of our experience which relate 
to 'interior' nouns and verbs such as 'anger', 'soul', and 'meditate'.  
It is also the focus of more abstract language which relates to 
ideas that associate aspects of subjective experience, such as 
'emotion', 'spiritual' and 'awake'.   Whatever we may sense 
inwardly can be included in the realm of the subject.

Science lost ground in the competition with other social 
constructs in describing the realm of the subject.  Its 
measurement devices and consensus-worldview did not convince 
those of other traditions of its veracity.  Not only this, but 
acceptance of the objective worldview with which Science came 
to be associated would mean abandoning the social groups upon 
which people had come to depend so heavily for their support.

This led to a dissension among scientists as many of them 
accepted the validity of a one-worldview knowledge-base.  Since
it had become a standard within other traditional organizations, 
those who favored the one-worldview system co-opted the ideal
of the Scientific Method by reformulating it as an 'objective' tool.  
This done, the tradition of Science would no longer pose such a
threat in the 'war of the worldviews'.

There have been many attempts to bridge the two traditions and
renew the vitality of the Scientific Method.  Early pioneers 
included Wilhelm Wundt and Structuralism, William James 
and Functionalism from the side of Science.  Mary Baker Eddy and 
Christian Science, and many adherents of what has become 
classified as 'Mysticism' are excellent examples among other 
traditions.


5) Knowledge and Truth

Knowledge, as previously stated, can be described as the system 
of data which one uses to orient individual experience.  It is 
largely determined by acculturation and personal exploration 
or Revelation.  

Truth, on the other hand, is typically understood to be the
correlation between one's knowledge and one's experience.
This is comparable to a carpenter's 'trueing' of a board.  We
integrate data which is 'true' to the model of our choice.  It
'fits'.   

Truth is reasonably determined by a comparison of 
worldviews with one's experience.  This is equivalent to 
selecting the best tool for the job of orienting in the world.  
It is simple enough on an individual level, yet when groups of 
people begin to get involved the situation becomes much more 
complex.

Social groups depend upon certain language-systems, images, 
and ideal foci for identity and cohesion.  When a particular 
social group gains political power, then it becomes capable of 
promoting certain worldviews over others toward its own ends.

The power of social groups to effect such promotion is quite 
expansive.  It may range from the indoctrination of one worldview 
with a built-in confusion between what is considered 'knowledge' and 
what is considered 'truth' to shaping one's language skills so as to 
create dependent citizens .    These mechanisms are of particular 
importance and requires a small analogy to illustrate.

Imagine an island which is difficult to navigate without a map.  
Imagine that a company on that island sells maps to interested 
tourists.   The island is our experience of the world.  The map is 
the worldview we use to orient and the company is the tradition 
which provides us with this worldview.

Next imagine that other companies appear on this island and 
compete by producing maps that are different than the original 
product.  Whether or not they are superior is of little importance.  
Let us assume that they are of approximately equal value or geared 
toward specific purposes and so are appealing to a large number of 
the island's tourists. This puts the company (the social group) in 
danger of dissolution.  Without some way to be sure that we, as 
tourists, will keep supporting them by using their map, it will 
fragment and dissolve.

Social groups are like individuals.  When their disintegration is at hand 
they may begin to resort to coercion to maintain support.  They often 
resort to such means as propaganda (effective marketing) and when 
this fails, begin to blurr the distinction between the map and the 
territory; between social data-systems and personal orientation-
schema; between knowledge and truth.

Effectively this is the same as the company convincing the 
individual to believe that the map which they are selling is the 
SAME as the island which they have come to explore.  This makes the 
map all the more valuable to acquire and thus stabilizes the company's 
support.

Another social mechanism which a tradition uses to promote its worldview 
is the control of government institutions of education.  These can be used 
to promote one worldview at the expense of those which compete with it 
by indoctrinating the young into single-mindedness.  Effectively this 
involves requiring that tourists learn to use one map while growing up.  

This establishes a dependency upon that system of knowledge.  If no 
method of transcending this worldview is genuinely imparted, then the 
religion which controls the educational institution effectively 
establishes a firm association between 'knowledge' and 'truth' and 
secures its continued support.

While those social groups classified as 'fundamentalist' (such as 
some major sects of the world's religions) use the former method of 
blurring the distinction of knowledge and truth fairly well, modern 
Science has been very effective at assuming control of Euro-American 
educational facilities, especially those which are influenced by 
government regulation.  

It is important to note that government is not to be 
overlooked in this analysis, often influencing systems of 
communication and education to promote a worldview in 
which it will be seen favorably by its supporters.


6) Resolution

A resolution between competing social groups will never 
satisfactorily be reached until the individual is given a choice 
regarding worldviews and makes their selection among them.  
Public 'education' which promotes one over the other handicaps 
the citizen's ability to orient one's life in an informed and 
reflective manner.

The Scientific Method, a tool of worldview creation, and 
Revelation, a reflective process of artistic disclosure, are two 
of the most effective means of achieving this informed, reflective 
state.  Support for them is paramount in protecting the individual 
from the mechanisms of social coercion.

Only by examining as many worldviews as desired and coming to use 
those which one selects based on one's reason and taste can a 
resolution to the many different problems of the world be addressed 
with maturity and vision.  

Education must not amount to indoctrination and information must 
not amount to propaganda.  The best way to educate our children is
to educate ourselves.  The carpenter who only has one tool will not 
succeed in building a house.  The tourist who only has one map will 
not succeed in successfully exploring the island, and the citizen
who has only one worldview will never be able to contribute to
a healthy government.

As a tradition, Science offers us one worldview (the objective) and
historically other traditions have been satisfied that one is
sufficient for our needs.  Perhaps they are correct, yet their interests
lie in maintaining their own continuation.  Take care that we do not
overlook the interests of the individual (and indeed the world) due to
an overemphasis on the concerns of one social group.

Doubt authority.   Imagine alternatives.   We can solve our problems 
with the tools we have available.   Please come together and begin 
to create new worldviews.  The quality of so many lives depends upon it.

-----------------------------------

Thyagi NagaSiva (Tagi@Cup.Portal.Com)
871 Ironwood Dr.
San Jose, CA 95125

(408) 266-2819 
Newsgroups: alt.atheism,talk.religion.misc