The slug fest between creationists and neo-Darwinists is a wonder to behold, complete with name calling and ignorance aplenty (http://www.amazon.com/Fair-Treatment-Evolution-Begins-Definition/forum/FxZ58KVEERYS5E/TxZ3SMZJCF16UR/1/ref=cm_cd_dp_rt_tft_tp/002-1053518-3647210?%5Fencoding=UTF8&cdAnchor=0595392458). It seems that some creationists might accede to “micro-evolution,” but not to “macro-evolution,” while neo-Darwinists seem unsure on where to draw the line. Of course, there is absolutely no dichotomy to be had in evolution. Evolution involves the motion of all things with respect to all other things. As I explained in "The Scientific Worldview," the universal mechanism of evolution is univironmental determinism (UD), the proposition that what happens to a portion of the universe is determined by the infinite matter in motion within and without. Nevertheless, I can sympathize a bit with the creationists. The presently accepted mechanism of evolution is "neo-Darwinism" (natural selection plus genetics). So in conventional thinking there indeed is a dichotomy: between the biological world and the rest of the universe. Once we remove this distinction by replacing neo-Darwinism with UD, the dichotomy disappears. This already has been done to some extent in the study of biopoesis (the origin of life from inorganic chemicals), which is a well-established theory whose efficacy is seldom debated by any scientist who has studied it in any detail. Countless scientists have stretched neo-Darwinism even further outside its bailiwick with the vague feeling that evolution is universally applicable. Neo-Darwinism, however, is only a special case of UD, and not an especially good one at that. As I showed in the book, it is gloriously incomplete—the biological microcosm consists of much more than just genes. We need to scrap neo-Darwinism as obsolete. UD removes the last vestige of the dichotomy hoped for by the rear-guard in the creationist camp. Only then can evolution assume its rightful place as the guiding paradigm of all science.
This is a blog that takes the name of my magnum opus on scientific philosophy called "The Scientific Worldview." Reviewers have called it “revolutionary,” “exhilarating,” “magnificent,” “fascinating,” and even “a breathtaking synthesis of all understanding.” There is very little math in it, no religion, no politics, no psycho-babble, and no BS. It provides the first outline of the philosophical perspective that will develop during the last half of the Industrial-Social Revolution.
20070629
The Fundamental Political Question
20070627
What is the Scientific Worldview?
PSI Blog 20070627
What is the Scientific Worldview?
The
popularity of atheistic books, such as Dawkin's "The God Delusion" and Hitchen's "God is Not Great,"
appear to be a reaction to the religious conflict that still afflicts much of
the globe. Reasonable people have difficulty comprehending the absurdities
promulgated by belief systems not their own. The contradictions between
religions are becoming more obvious as communication becomes increasingly
global. Students in Kansas, for instance, can lookup "evolution" and
"the scientific worldview" without their relatives finding out. The
ideas behind these words challenge beliefs that have instilled and enforced
political loyalty for millennia.
"The
scientific worldview" is bandied about with very little specificity
concerning exactly what it is. Until recently, there were only a few books with
that title and none focusing on what it really was. Before "The Scientific Worldview,"
there were two other worldviews that were scientific rather than religious:
classical mechanism and systems philosophy. The first overemphasized the
outsides of things; the second overemphasizes the insides of things. As modern
scientists, we have developed the habit of drawing spheres around the portions
of the universe that we want to study
and ignoring whatever is outside them.
The
Scientific Worldview argues for a combination of these two previous views. This
combination amounts to a new universal mechanism of evolution: “univironmental
determinism,” the proposition that whatever happens to a portion of the
universe is a result of the infinite variety of matter in motion within and
without. The upshot is that evolution is occurring to all portions of the
universe during every microsecond. What prevented the scientific worldview from
being expressed as clearly before, is my beginning assumption of microcosmic
and macrocosmic infinity.
Infinity
never could be completely amenable to the mathematics of Newton or Einstein or
to the common belief that the universe had a beginning, just like everything else.
The proponents of the Big Bang Theory (BBT) are cock-sure that the universe had
an origin. They have forced us to confront the ultimate question: Has
the universe exploded out of nothing or has it existed everywhere for all time?
The answer to this question will never be known with complete certainty.
Nonetheless, the rejection of the BBT and the acceptance of the universe as
infinite and eternal remains the last step in overcoming the myopia of our
pre-Copernican heritage. It is my fondest wish that "The Scientific Worldview"
will play a significant part in that ultimate transition.
My review of
Dawkins book, with a bit on why religion evolved and why it continues to be popular:
“The God Delusion” Stalking Horse for "The Scientific
Worldview"
This book,
written mostly for agnostics, easily achieved bestseller status stemming from
Dawkins's great initial success with "The Selfish Gene" and his
subsequent anointment as the leading intellectual in Great Britain. It is one
of the many popular books on atheism now appearing as stalking horses for the
coming intellectual revolution outlined more fully in "The Scientific Worldview".
He reiterates, in a generally personable way, all the arguments for and against
god. He goes on to calculate that there is a 99% chance that there is no god,
but like most systems philosophers, doesn't blink in the face of claims that
the universe exploded out of nothing.
Unfortunately,
Dawkins misses the boat entirely in claiming that religion is a secondary,
coincidental, vestigial by-product of evolution. In my opinion, its ubiquity
and close association with political organization and warfare makes religion
one of the most important products of evolution. Besides having an albeit bogus
answer for our existence, its primary purpose is to instill and enforce
loyalty. This is why logic is secondary in the minds of theists. Absurdities
within a religion are accepted as a matter of course through religious "education"
of the most gullible members of society.
The
religions of other tribes are considered even more absurd. One takes a big
chance leaving the safety of the home tribe in an attempt to join some other
tribe that may not be accepting of outsiders and their strange beliefs. To
belong to no tribe at all verges on suicide. Often, it seems that the more
absurd the belief, the stronger the loyalty. Loyalty obviously is necessary for
defense against other groups that may forcefully attempt to take scarce resources
for themselves. Thus, warfare, religion, and nationalism go hand-in-hand.
Globalization
at first intensifies the contacts that initially produce economic competition
and war, with cooperation and peace eventually being the long-awaited result.
Like most of us, Dawkins hopes for and predicts a more enlightened world as
well. May the force be with him. For the next step in your education see: The Scientific Worldview: Beyond
Newton and Einstein
For the
latest on no-nonsense physics and cosmology, see:
Borchardt,
Glenn, 2017, Infinite Universe Theory: Berkeley, California, Progressive
Science Institute, 327 p. [http://go.glennborchardt.com/IUTebook].
And
Borchardt,
Glenn, 2020, Religious Roots of Relativity: Berkeley, California, Progressive
Science Institute, 160 p. [https://go.glennborchardt.com/RRR-ebk].
20070626
Welcome to “The Scientific Worldview”
PSI Blog 20070626 Welcome to "The Scientific Worldview" This is a blog that takes the name of my magnum opus on scientific philosophy called "The Scientific Worldview: Beyond Newton and Einstein (Understanding the Universal Mechanism of Evolution)." Reviewers have called it “revolutionary,” “exhilarating,” “magnificent,” “fascinating,” and even “a breathtaking synthesis of all understanding.” There is very little math in it, no religion, no politics, and no BS. It provides the first outline of the philosophical perspective that will develop during the last half of the Industrial-Social Revolution. It is the book that Thomas Kuhn warned us about. You can order it here: (http://www.thescientificworldview.com/).
The purpose of this blog is to:
|