Ghost of a flea: A scientific orthodoxy is a contradiction in terms

? Dambusters | Main | Liaisons dangereuses: Los niños del parque ?

May 17, 2008

A scientific orthodoxy is a contradiction in terms

Orson Scott Card sees an old pattern reasserting itself in politically dominated areas of scientific inquiry. Much to think about regarding Darwinism, Intelligent Design and "global warming" and the farcical spectacle of scientists voting on the truth.* But I will limit myself to quoting my favourite part.

It has happened before -- valuable knowledge is lost, along with the knowledge of how to get knowledge. Ancient Egyptian medicine was known to be the best in the world -- specifically because a generation of physicians actually tested their remedies to make sure they worked. But within a few generations, their successors had made the insane (but common) choice to treat the conclusions of these great physicians, rather than their methods, as sacred.

So Egyptian medicine, the best in the world at that time, ossified and, in effect, died. They stopped progressing because they valued the conclusion over the method of learning.

This via Ace who also comments at length. For example, the following:

I've used the example of Thor and his lightning bolts. Even if it were actually, provably true that Thor created lightning with his hammer -- like, you could actually see him in the clouds making lightning -- science could not embrace this fact as part of science, because then all research into lightning would end.

As I wrote at AOSHQ, under these conditions, Thor would make an excellent subject of scientific inquiry even if he would not sit down for a physical or a questionnaire. There is all sorts of scientific work that can be carried out - indeed must be carried out - in the field rather than in a laboratory setting.

But these conditions would render Thor a subject for the natural sciences rather than a purported supernatural phenomenon. This is not only a question of epistemology but underscores something important about our age. Even if the existence of an Intelligent Designer - let's say a single creator God rather than aliens with monoliths - would not shock us in the way proof of God would once have denied faith (see the Hitchhiker's Guide for details). Instead, we would learn something fascinating about the physical universe and apply our minds accordingly.

Except for Muslims, obviously. Their monism would preclude such inquiry.

* Both "voting" and "truth" being problematical to scientific method.

Also at Ace: British judges turn in wigs for Star Trek robes.

Posted by Ghost of a flea at May 17, 2008 07:03 AM