Blog 20160615 Why should I believe Einstein if I do
not understand him?
This was a question brought forth by henk
korbee, who has the habit of asking questions of great philosophical as well as
physical importance. We could restate it as a question of why we should believe
anything at all. Now, henk is neither a presently enrolled student, nor a
teacher of physics. He can afford to express skepticism mostly because he has
no skin in the game. Like most skeptics, henk is unlikely to suffer consequences
because of such utterances.
Of course, there are many reasons to believe Einstein
without understanding him. The propaganda surrounding this one particular man
has been enormous and incessant. Furthermore, he has been “proven right” almost
daily since 1905. We tend to believe those we admire or are told to admire by
those who we admire as well. Belief without understanding is common. Without it,
religion could not survive. As Joyce Meyer exhorts us: “Don’t
reason! Just obey!” Beliefs are powerful instillers and enforcers of
loyalty—the primary evolutionary purpose of religion. Skepticism at the wrong
moment can have fateful consequences.
In these days of “paradigm change,” much is
made of skepticism, “critical thinking,” and the proposition that we need
diversity in theoretical speculation. Some even believe that no single theory can
possibly describe natural phenomena. This is typical of the anarchistic period
that precedes all revolutions. The overthrow of a particular paradigm is
perpetrated by uncompensated skeptics who simply cannot believe in what once
was.
The problem with skepticism, however, is its inherent
negativity and pessimism. The replacement of belief by disbelief may suit the
anarchistic period, but it is not suited to building a replacement for the old
paradigm. For that, we need new beliefs, in particular, a new foundation consisting
of fundamental assumptions upon which we can build the new
paradigm. We all need to believe in something to get things done. That is why I
encourage folks to believe in "The Ten Assumptions of Science."[1]
If you do not like those, gather you own, making sure they are consupponible.
[1] Borchardt, Glenn, 2004, The ten assumptions of
science: Toward a new scientific worldview: Lincoln, NE, iUniverse, 125 p.
[http://www.scientificphilosophy.com/].
1 comment:
Moderation in all things say Aristotle and Franklin.
Healthy skepticism is included.
Actually, David Hume argued long ago that we really can't have absolute knowledge. Theories are just the best we can do.
What people believe may or may not have any relationship to reality.
"All is interpretation". F. Nietzsche
Post a Comment