The only science that will be unbiased is that
an unbiased observer. There are no unbiased observers !
A true scientist remains brutally
"Science is essentially prophecy." - Alan
of scientific knowledge consists of a
perennial rigging and collapsing of ever expanding
paradigms - every expansion denied
and fought off with the last-ditch obstinacy of old guard scientists."-
"In social sciences, the
conventional terminology eliminates critical standards and puts
ethics on ice." -
Andrew M. Lobaczewski
"The world-view of classical science informs the
dominant beliefs of our culture. Science is
a vast and elaborate articulation of the defining myth of our civilization: that
we are discrete and separate selves, living in
an objective universe of others. Science presupposes, embodies, and reinforces
that myth, blinding us to other
living, and being." -
"The professional standards of science must impose
a framework of discipline and at the same time encourage rebellion against it.
They must demand that, in order to be taken seriously, an investigation should
largely conform to the currently predominant beliefs about the nature of
things, while allowing that in order to be original it may to some extent go
against these." - John C. Polanyi
The goal of Science is to obtain
Reality. Collections of information about physical processes are termed
data. Collecting data to support theories is laborious. Details of that
process, including fundamental assumptions made, are often excluded when
forming a scientific theory. Data that is vague or overgeneralized is easier to
fit to a scientific theory than specific data.
The philosophy of science
deals with the systemic nature of scientific enquiry.
understand the philosophy of science, it is necessary to understand the basic
components of science - data, theories, and
Scientific theories come
in two forms.
Phenomenological theories are empirical generalizations
of data. They merely describe the recurring processes of nature and do not
refer to their causes or mechanisms. Phenomenological theories are also called
scientific laws, physical laws, and natural
Explanatory theories attempt to explain the
observations rather than
generalize them. Whereas laws are descriptions of empirical regularities,
explanatory theories are conceptual
constructions to explain why the phenomena Exist.
Shaping principles are non-empirical
fundamental assumptions that form the basis of science and go into selecting
science, a systematic way of acquiring knowledge, was seen as absolutely
objective, rational, and based on purely
empirical observations. This
traditional image of science held that
scientific theories and laws were to be conclusively confirmed or conclusively
falsified based on objective data. It was believed that "the scientific method"
excluded cognitive biases,
emotion, intuition, assumptions and was based entirely
on logic and reason.
The definition of what
"the scientific method" is has changed over time.
In the early seventeenth century
Baconian inductivism was considered to be "the
scientific method." The basic idea was
this: collect as numerous of observations as humanly possible,
remain unaffected by any prior prejudice, theoretical preconceptions or
cognitive bias while gathering the data, inductively infer theories from those
data (by generalizing the data into physical laws), and collect more data to
modify or reject the hypothesis if needed.
Unfortunately, when using
inductivism to arrive at natural laws, certain theoretical preconceptions are
generalize the data into physical laws, the individual must assume that the
laws apply for physical processes not observed. This results in several
assumptions being held, such as the uniform operation of nature. Even if we put
aside the fact that inductive logic is invariably based on such postulations,
there is another problem. Science deals with concepts and explanatory theories
that cannot be directly observed, including atomic theory and the theory of
gravity. Many other theories include unobservable concepts like
forces, fields, and subatomic particles.
There is no known rigorous inductive logic that can infer those
theories and concepts solely from the data they explain.
Newton developed hypothetico-deductivism in the late 1600s. Essentially, one
starts with a hypothesis, basically a provisional theory, and then deduces what
we would expect to find in the empirical world as a result of that hypothesis.
The idea was to quarantine human irrationality or cognitive bias. A theory did
not become a valid theory by its origins, but because of the
hypothetico-deductive method of verification.
fails if rigorous proof is necessary for valid science . We must assume that:
memory, and testimony are all generally
reliable; we have examined all the data and there is no possibility future
observations will behave
unexpectedly. Every theory has an infinite number of
expected empirical outcomes, and we are
incapable of testing all of those expectations. So even though a scientific
theory can be confirmed to some extent by empirical data, it can never be
conclusively confirmed. In science or anywhere else, any given body of data (no
matter how large) will always be in sync with an unlimited number of
alternative theories that explain the exact same data and at least some of the
theories will contradict each other. This reality is expressed as data
underdetermining theories, or is simply referred to as the underdetermination
of theories. As a result of the underdetermination of theories and the risk of
undiscovered, contradictory empirical evidence, a scientific theory cannot be
conclusively proven merely through the data.
Karl Popper recognized
that one could not record everything observed. Some sort of selection is
needed, and thus observation
is always selective. Karl Popper believed that a hypothesis had to be created
first for scientific investigation to begin as there is no other way to tell
which data is relevant and to be observed. More importantly Karl Popper
developed the idea of falsification which suggests that if a prediction does
not come true, then the scientific theory must be false. Popper's idea of the
scientific method was for scientists to test scientific theories in experiments
where the outcome could potentially falsify the theory, especially in
experiments where the theory would most likely collapse. The necessity for a
scientific theory to be conclusively falsifiable is known as the demarcation
Surprisingly, the problem is that it is impossible to
conclusively falsify theories by empirical data.
by themselves, are incapable of making predictions. Instead, the empirical
consequences of a theory invariably rest on background assumptions (also called
auxiliary assumptions) from which to derive predictions and even to obtain
Suppose we have a particle theory that says if we process a
certain particle in a particular way, we will get specified values on various
1. All theories (the particular electrical, atomic,
particle, etc. models that are used) involved in deriving the prediction are
2. The specific version of those theories and models (from #1)
from which the predictions are derived from are correct (for example, belief in
atoms have been widely accepted for quite some time now, but the precise
details and models of the exact composition, components etc. have significantly
3. The prediction derived from those theories and specific
versions of those models is mathematically or logically correct; and
Some other things we'll skip.
Note that most of the items depend on
scientific theories. But scientific theories, remember, cannot be conclusively
proven. The dependence on background assumptions to make predictions is
sometimes called the Duhem-Quine problem. Besides using auxiliary assumptions
to make predictions, such assumptions are necessary to find out if the
predictions come true. Suppose that in order to test our particle theory in the
real world we must use a certain particle accelerator in a particular way. To
experimentally test this, we must adhere to the following statements:
1. All of the theories and models (particle, electronic, engineering)
used in what we believe happens inside this accelerator are correct (including
2. All theories (electronics and so forth) on how the
detector works are correct (including the specifics of the models involved);
3. Both the detection devices and the accelerator are operating as
4. Both of the above devices are being used properly
(including the assumption that the readings are recorded correctly); and
5. Some other things we'll skip again.
several of the items are again dependent on scientific theories, which cannot
be rigorously proven. Suppose the prediction does not come true and we observe
that, "this particle did not have the specified properties that it should've
had." That observation would
be heavily dependent on theories. Although it is possible that our theory could
be wrong, it is also possible that
instead one or more of the assumptions listed are
wrong. Often, the terminology used to
describe experimental results in addition to the measurements and instruments
used in testing theories make up another set of background assumptions. The
dependence on such postulations for obtaining data is described as
Theories can neither be conclusively proven nor
conclusively falsified by empirical data. It is possible to salvage a troubled
theory or make arguments against a well-supported theory simply by altering
auxiliary assumptions to produce different predictions or change the meaning of
theory-laden observations. It is also possible to modify virtually any theory
so that it's consistent with whatever data that might come up.
evident that theories and data by themselves are insufficient for science to
work, and thus other factors are needed for science to operate. This group of
factors in the nature of science is that of shaping principles, which can be used to
select theories and form the foundations of science. Many assumptions are made
in science. One example is the uniformity of nature. That is, the belief that
natural processes operate in a fairly consistent manner. This
shaping principles is the basis for
the idea of natural laws.
Natural laws could not exist in science
without assuming the uniformity of nature. Other assumptions made for science
to operate include the belief that there exists an external objective reality,
that our senses are generally reliable, and so forth.
Another set of
shaping principles evaluates the
empirical evidence to select theories. Because of the underdetermination of
theories, there is always an infinite number of competing theories that can
accommodate any given set of empirical data. Since these competing theories are
empirically indistinguishable from each other, if science is to pick out a
theory from among these numerous competitors and claim that it is correct, then
such a selection must be based on nonempirical principles (whether they be
philosophical, personal, societal, or whatever). Ockham's razor or the law of
parsimony, a fundamental shaping
principles of logic, states that, if all
other aspects are equal, the simplest
theory is preferred over other theories involving additional complexity.
The law of parsimony especially applies to theories with ad hoc
hypotheses. The lower the number of ad hoc hypotheses a scientific theory has,
the better. Other principles include
(but are not limited to) empirical adequacy (covering the pertinent data in
some suitable way), self-consistency, fruitfulness (giving rise to other
understandings and having stimulated pioneering investigations and
advancements), and explanatory power.
shaping principle is how well a theory
ties in with other scientific theories and concepts that are rational to
believe. It is only when these kinds of shaping principles interact with data can
science then provide rational support for a theory over its competitors.
There are a few exceptions to the idea that there is no conclusive
proof in science. Logic is the closest we can get to rigorous proof and
falsification. Sadly, not very many helpful theories can be thoroughly proved
by logic, and logic disproving a scientific theory is almost never used because
seldom does a scientist propose a theory that is logically impossible.
Typically science relies on other shaping
principles to pick theories.
shaping principles to select a theory,
we must have some philosophical basis for believing that nature's preferences
are similar to ours. And for many of these
principles there is no logical rule to imply their reliability. For
example, in picking out a theory from among it's empirically indistinguishable
competitors (and when all other factors are held constant),
the notion that reality favors simple
theories over complex ones is nevertheless a philosophical principle.
Although these indicators of theoretical truth are necessary for science to
work, they are significantly indirect, circumstantial, highly fallible, and are
still unable to prove/disprove theories.
While science may be the best
we can do, the limitations should still be recognized.
intuitively feel how rational scientific theories are, rather than having a
precise logical method for such judgments. These intuitive feelings result from
shaping principles. The interactions of
shaping principles in the minds of
scientists are so complex and so numerous that we may never come up with a
rigorously logical system to select theories. Most of the
shaping principles are frequently
unspoken and sometimes
themselves do not know they are using them. Although some
shaping principles are based on
logic, others are not always so sensible and
objective. Scientists (and regular human beings) are also affected by cultural,
social, and personal beliefs. Shaping
principles influence the data we perceive as there is a tendency for the
mind to unconsciously fill in patterns based on these notions. Such human
contamination is called internal theoretical orientation of data. As a result,
totally objective data cannot be obtained.
Unfortunately there is no
known way to separate the helpful
principles (explanatory power etc.) from the unfavorable ones (personal
biases etc.) in the subconscious minds of scientists that make these theory
judgments. Because every human being has their own unique set of shaping principles,
different scientists (and regular human beings) can look at the exact same set
of data and disagree about which theory most
rationally explains the observations. Science, therefore, is inescapably
corrupted with bias as a bias towards favored theories is actually built into
all scientific research.
A delicate tapestry, a spider's web, is woven
based on background assumptions and a
collection of theories combined with their shaping and background
principles which thus make up an explanatory matrix, or conceptual grid, in
which to fit the observed data.
Nobel prize winning physicist Max
Planck has said, "A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its
opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents
eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with
A truly rational mind is an ethical mind.
consciousness evolved through the conscious realization that one's own mind
The magical mind lacked real awareness of its own
irrationality. The mystical mind was steeped in a
reality that may simply be due to the large number of variables that are
very difficult to track.
The magical mystical mind built Creation
narratives to explain its existence and
embellished upon those
narratives in the attempt to understand the Nature of the Reality it inhabited.
Eventually people began to recognize their own ignorance and discovered that
there was knowledge that did not come down
through the Oral Tradition.
There was knowledge not known
traditionally that was worth pursuing and knowing. The modern mind conceived of
a new way to think in the matrix of evolving human
There can be no rationality without the recognition and the
precondition of ignorance.
Modern science is the methodology of turning
ignorance (nescience) into knowledge
the truly rational
mind is imbued with a set of ethical or
meta-ethical principles: (1) Intellectual honesty (and consequentially
humility) in the recognition of the fundamental human through the recognition
of one's own ignorance. (2) Intellectual integrity in the commitment to
(seeking and knowing) truth. (3) Intellectual responsibility in
the discipline of critical
Intellectual honesty, integrity, and responsibility
constitute the meta-ethical foundation of ethics.
That which makes the
discipline of modern (natural/physical)
science an authentic science is
the scientific method.
Can the scientific method be applied individually to individual thought
consciousness that is not fragmented and the mind that is truly scientific will
pursue ethical questions with intellectual honesty, humility, integrity, and
responsibility, and will attempt to make choices that take all parties into
consideration while respecting their individuality.
Mistakes will occur
but the truly ethical rationalist will recognize mistakes and make the proper
retractions and corrections.
conscious mind that is not fragmented and truly rational will pursue
ethical questions with intellectual honesty, humility, integrity, and
responsibility, and will refrain from judgement for as long as is psychically
For the human mind that is steeped in magical mysetry, no
rational ethical perfection is possible for that mind refuses to actually look
at its own magically mystical bias'.
Only the individual that uses the human mind in a rational manner -
careful observation of variables along with careful observation of internal
reactions to variable events - will ever come close to ethical
Those that feel they need to own a series of
symbols which convey a
concept are reminded that
words in series are like math formulas and
Everything is a Remix.
honest and ethical mind will not
attempt to "enclose" concepts,
ideas or symbol series while pretending to own
castles in the air !
It will share those castles !
honest and ethical mind
recognizes its place in the collective.
And will know it is not wanted
adapted from a facebook post made by
Archimedes, Sicilian mathematician
The distance and size of the
celestial bodies can be found by determining the
size of their eccentric and epicyclic circles relative to the Earth's radius.
Earth can be projected onto a plane map using
geometrical techniques; localities can be plotted on a standard grid of
latitude and longitude lines.
Problems in plane and spherical trigonometry
can be solved with the help of a table of
the chords subtending the arcs from 0° to 90°.
data derived from
experiments can be
represented by mathematical
equations and can be presented in tabular
Ptolemy, Eygptian astronomer
Earth is not at the center of the universe.
The sun, the planets, and the stars do not revolve around the
Earth; rather; the
Earth is one of the planets, and it revolves around the
sun, as do the other planets.
The apparent "loops" that the
planets make in their
motions across the
heavens are not
motions; they are mere
appearances, caused by our position on the Earth and the Earth's
motion around the
sun relative to the other
The appearance of the
heavens' rotation about the
Earth is due to the
fact that we are on the Earth's surface and the
Earth is rotating about its axis once every
twenty four hours.
Nicholas Copernicus, Polish astronomer
Skeptical inquiry makes for
good human life.
Appearances vary according to the
condition of the
observer and the
nature of what is to be
Sextus Empiricus, Greek physician and
Giambattista Vico, Italian philosopher, historian,
Marie-Jean Antoine Nicholas de Caritat, French
Carl Freidrich Gauss, German mathematician and
James Clerk Maxwell, Scottish mathematical
In our disenchanted
world, violence has become the decisive means for
Society must be
understood objectively, a procedure
that entails refusing to jump to evaluative conclusions.
An important contribution of
the social scientist is to alert us to
inconvenient facts and the unintended
Humankind may be constructing its own iron
Ironically and tragically, our own presumed
success and progress may trap us.
Max Weber, Maximilian Weber, German political
economist and sociologist
Formerly no one was allowed to think
now it is permitted, but no
one is capable of it any more.
Now people want to think only what they
supposed to think, and this they consider
Oswald Spengler, German mathmatician
Perhaps the most obvious political effect of
news is the advantage it gives
powerful people in getting their
issues on the political agenda and
defining those issues in ways
likely to influence their
W. Lance Bennett, political scientist
What are the
moral convictions most fondly held by
are the convictions that authority
soundest basis of belief;
merit attaches to readiness to believe;
that the doubting disposition is a bad one,
and skepticism is a
Thomas Henry Huxley, British biologist
Arnold Toynbee, English economic historian
There is no
knowledge. And those who claim it, whether
they are scientists or dogmatists, open the door to
information is imperfect. we have to treat it
Jacob Bronowski, English-Polish
believe in an
Science has proved that nothing
disintegrates into nothingness.
and soul, therefore,
cannot disintegrate into nothingness, and so are
Wernher Magnus Maximilian Freiherr von Braun,
German rocket scientist
stagnant water loses
and in cold weather
even so does inaction sap the vigor of the mind.
It is hard to have patience with people who say
'There is no
death' or 'death doesn't matter.'
And whatever is
And whatever happens has
and it and they
are irrevocable and irreversible.
might as well say that birth doesn't
Leonardo da Vinci, Italian scientist and
None are more hopelessly
they are free.
There is a lurking
fear that some things are not meant
to be known," that some inquiries
are too dangerous for human
beings to make.
Carl Sagan, American astronomer and
we are so dumb about what
life is because we only have one example. It
may be true that we sail through the universe
and everything we find is carbon and
water, but I would
hesitate to conclude that based on
the one example we have.
-Chris McKay, astrobiologist
remember that you are
Just like everyone else.
A small group
of thoughtful people could change the world.
Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has.
television, for the very first
time the young are seeing
history being made before it is censored
by their elders.
I must admit that I personally
success in terms of the contributions an
individual makes to her or his fellow
I was brought up to
believe that the only thing worth doing was
to add to the sum of accurate information in the world.
It is an open
question whether any behavior based on
punishment can be regarded as
ethical or should be regarded as merely
The solution to adult problems tomorrow depends on
large measure upon how our
children grow up today.
We won't have a society if we destroy the
Margaret Mead, American cultural anthropologist, Presidential Medal of
"Science teaches us to look more closely,
to see more clearly. We decide that a theory
is valid only when it is proved by
experimentation and that
experimentation can be
replicated, and if it cannot be, we learn from this too and say: Here are the
limits of what is possible now. Science
is valid because it cannot be taken on faith alone.
In a complicated
reality, the public must
because how can you
know what to do if you cannot
know what is
truth, always, we teach
students, withhold nothing from your
It is a categorical imperative for
science and indeed for all
To 'tell the
truth always' comes from Immanuel Kant."
-Laurie Zoloth, professor of
medical humanities and bioethics
at Northwestern University's Feinberg
In August of 1962, Mariner 2 was launched for a
quick rendezvous with nearby Venus,
zipping by at a distance of 22,000 miles, scanning its radiation field and
proving that a terminal case of global warming
had completely ruined its surface for our kind of life.
That fly-by ushered in nearly half a
century of interplanetary visitations of historic evolutionary significance. About 4.6 billion
years after Earth and a handful of
planet siblings were assembled by random
collisions of rock, metal and ice, our planet began flinging small bits of itself
back out into the darkness, trying to
satisfy a newly evolved curiosity
with fragile machines equipped with
cameras and radio transmitters.
took so long because first there had to be a species with the audacity to think
that it could build such contraptions, calculate their trajectories and make them
we did it.
There is no more solid, visceral confirmation
of the truths embodied by the
Enlightenment and the
our ideas about other
planets are merely a "text" to be
deconstructed, or another creation story to
debate, if they are culturally determined,
internally constructed, dreamed, projected or
imagined, then why are the
planets there, right there, where we
thought they would be?
Greenspoon, curator of astrobiology at the Denver Museum of Nature and
back to stacks
This web site is not a commercial web site and
is presented for educational purposes only.
This website defines a new
perspective with which to engage reality to which its author adheres. The
author feels that the falsification of reality outside personal experience has
created a populace unable to discern propaganda from reality and that this has
been done purposefully by an international corporate cartel through their
agents who wish to foist a corrupt version of reality on the human race.
Religious intolerance occurs when any group refuses to tolerate religious
practices, religious beliefs or persons due to their religious ideology. This
web site marks the founding of a system of philosophy named The Truth of the
Way of Life - a rational gnostic mystery religion based on reason which
requires no leap of faith, accepts no tithes, has no supreme leader, no church
buildings and in which each and every individual is encouraged to develop a
personal relation with the Creator and Sustainer through the pursuit of the
knowledge of reality in the hope of curing the spiritual corruption that has
enveloped the human spirit. The tenets of The Truth of the Way of Life are
spelled out in detail on this web site by the author. Violent acts against
individuals due to their religious beliefs in America is considered a
This web site in no way condones violence. To the
contrary the intent here is to reduce the violence that is already occurring
due to the international corporate cartels desire to control the human race.
The international corporate cartel already controls the world central banking
system, mass media worldwide, the global industrial military entertainment
complex and is responsible for the collapse of morals, the elevation of
self-centered behavior and the destruction of global ecosystems. Civilization
is based on cooperation. Cooperation does not occur at the point of a
American social mores and values have declined precipitously over
the last century as the corrupt international cartel has garnered more and more
power. This power rests in the ability to deceive the populace in general
through mass media by pressing emotional buttons which have been preprogrammed
into the population through prior mass media psychological operations. The
results have been the destruction of the family and the destruction of social
structures that do not adhere to the corrupt international elites vision of
a perfect world. Through distraction
and coercion the direction of thought of the bulk of the population has been
directed toward solutions proposed by the corrupt international elite that
further consolidates their power and which further their purposes.
views and opinions presented on this web site are the views and opinions of
individual human men and women that, through their writings, showed the
capacity for intelligent, reasonable, rational,
insightful and unpopular thought.
All factual information presented on this web site is believed to be true and
accurate and is presented as originally presented in print media which may or
may not have originally presented the facts truthfully. Opinion and thoughts
have been adapted, edited, corrected, redacted, combined, added to, re-edited
and re-corrected as nearly all opinion and thought has been throughout time but
has been done so in the spirit of the original writer with the intent of making
his or her thoughts and opinions clearer and relevant to the reader in the
Fair Use Notice
This site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has
not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making
such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of criminal
justice, human rights, political, economic, democratic,
scientific, and social justice
issues, etc. We believe this
constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in
section 107 of the United States Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17
U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed
without profit to those who have
expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research
and educational purposes. For more information see:
www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted
material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you
must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
© Lawrence Turner
All Rights Reserved