Is science the answer in discovery of a new world

It is easy to observe that science today is a primary part of our civilized foundation.  Perhaps it is the foundation.  Science is responsible for explaining, life, physics, chemistry, the Universe and origin.  All science is built upon the ability to quantify.

Math is the likely predecessor to the discovery of science.  Without math, science wouldn’t be able to assess anything.  Without measurement there would be no means to achieve the scientific method.  This definition is the basis to all science: to put forth a new theory while using validated steps in observation and experimentation to prove the proposed thesis as right or wrong.

It’s a Language

Math as the linear predecessor to science must also be appreciated for what it is.  Math is a language.  All languages have symbols, rules, concepts and frameworks so that in practice there is clarity in expression and also in interpretation.  In all language, modification and expansion is anticipated to allow for additional growth.

In languages, as math and science, there is a desire for truth.  Mathematicians love truth for in its discovery more bedrock is found and thereby used to create more understanding and life.  The search for truth in science is exactly the same procedurally in appreciation as it is the same logic that founded math.  In essence, we use math as the root language to explain the other language of science.

While science and math have contributed undeniably to human civilization there are many weaknesses or limits in these founding principals that construct these channels of dialog and understanding.  This gets overlooked because of today’s enormous popularity and acceptance with these primary pillars occupying the very nature of our foundation.  As an example of weakness consider the desire to create a truth.

In either discipline, a thesis is put forth with an understanding that it can remain a truth unless proved wrong.  This is a desired trait in accordance with the founding philosophies of such thinking.  However, there is an underlying idea, or even flaw, that something is only real as defined exclusively by tangible measurement in support of the thesis.

There is much history and appreciation for this paradigm in honor of the illumination math and science has and does make.  Math and science has corrected many supposed truths told in folk-tales, myths, mysticism, legend and religion.   All of which were considered true in the moment.  This is both applicable from a historical account as much as it is accurate today.

It is interesting that the founding principles used as the basis of math and science and even formal religion may be flawed.  They are recognized for what they are as contributors to the whole.  Suppose that the basis for science as we have known it, for the short 300 to 500 years in which we’ve embraced it, is not the means for achieving our continued desire for enlightened growth.

Our Beliefs

This is bold initiative and it may be very hard to imagine civilization without math, science or religion.  For the ever-brief moment allow this thought.  In this observation see the basis of all of humanity’s foundation suddenly became very small and weak.  Perhaps so uncomfortable and unimaginable that you can’t or won’t allow yourself to conceive of the idea.

Nothing is being taken away.  You will always have access to math, science, language, beliefs and even religion.   Imagine living in the Middle Ages where science, and especially the scientific method, were just being introduced.  It was a very scary and uncomfortable time.  This proved true for both governorship and the people.

Protecting the known

Math as a language was not at war in its discovery with any belief system -no more than science.   Yet, science was seen as an enemy to many beliefs and understandings at the time of its inception and persecution followed.  Consequently, the scientific community is still protective of itself today especially with anyone bringing forth a new thesis.  This is so common and expected that new ideas are met with constant “professional” skepticism, ridicule and cynicism.

The same persecuting energy of those protecting their deity and their respective organizations has, now for the most part, switched to the peers within the disciplines of math and science.  This is in alignment with the foundational principles of these expressions.  Truth is only truth unless you can prove it.  This is fundamentally unproductive and unsound.

Egotism and vanity promoted via these disciplines approve of truth by their not being able to disprove it.  In simpler terms, truth is king of the hill until some better concept can knock it off its throne.  This process is still predominantly accepted as the best we’ve got.   Maybe there is a much more efficient means for the world to develop and grow.

In the first discovery of science as a method of development, measurements were used for reasons of comparison, experimentation and conclusion.  This isn’t bad.  But maybe just maybe there’s something coming that is better.  It is unlikely to be found exclusively in languages of our current philosophies, paradigms and beliefs.  If history has recorded anything at all correctly it is we don’t know what we think we know.

Traveling down our progressive road with milepost after milepost having now been proven wrong so many times it is apparent the founding nature of these processes, alone, will not suffice.  This would include those age-old belief systems that aren’t assisting us either in our desire to grow as people of the world.  This is observed not in bias but with candid objectivity.  For enlightenment to transpire there must be a new understanding.