The Meta-POV of Science
- Magical Realist
- Posts: 127
- Joined: August 28th, 2009, 8:47 pm
- Location: Portland Oregon
The Meta-POV of Science
Take a planet in some far away galaxy for example. Now in order to conceive of it I must posit a sort hoverability of my disembodied self around and over that planet. There IS, iow, inherent in the planet's existence a real adjacent space consisting of a near infinite number of visual POV's I can have on it. I could not conceive of the planet existing otherwise.
Does this suggest that for every possible real situation or object there is at least one corresponding and real POV on it?
Now lets look at the POV science is always assuming for itself. It is of a sort of scale-invariant consciousness or visualization of phenomena at all levels of magnification. The Big Bang..Quantum entanglement..The evolution of life..M-branes..Dark matter..Chaotic turbulence. All these phenomena/events posit a meta-POV from which all these processes can be visualized and conceptualized in common. There is, iow, a subjectivity posited that is present to them that is beyond anything like what we have in our own experience and that is directly proportional to the objectivity of the event we are positing as happening.
But where is this meta-Subject in the overall scheme of science? It is conspicuously missing it seems. People go to universities for long periods of time to learn how to properly adopt this subjectivity by which the events and phenomena of the universe can become objectified as real. Some history. Some experimentation in labs. Alot of theory. And alot of math. Suddenly they get to wear the golden epistemic crown of omniconceivability that used only to belong--dare I say it--to a God.
But is it REAL?
2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month
Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023
Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023