This post will require a viewing of the video as I think it captures the essence of what I have observed fairly well, sorry. This also might be a chaotic post.
Does it seem to people that people (other ones of course, not you!) seem to put a lot of stock in the Higgs Boson discovery. The video mocks the level of celebration that people are enjoying with the "greatest discovery of the century" (I mean, we are only twelve years in).
Will science take the place of religion? Will the scientific method take over the State?
If people developed for a few (several) millenia with the mentality of religion, does religion form a necessary part of our 'civilized' psyche?
It would seem to me that this is the case. I have thought for awhile that the State is what fills the "God hole" for most secular democrats, but upon reflection think that 'science' might displace even the critical functions of the State at some point. The video points out that simlarity between 'believing' in God and 'believing in the higgs boson'. CERN becomes a temple, the research data, scripture; 'None can see it [the higgs] and the ability to weaponize it becomes...a thing.' The state, in order to be efficient and logical, would seek to replicate that of what the scientific method dictates and hence become the enforcement arm of the administrators of scientific inquiry, another point in the video.
At the very end of the video Robert says, "[this]." I have heard it argued before, as I sure others have, that the scientific method has numerous flaws, but one glaring one is the hypothesis. One is just supposed to dream up an explanation to something, then figure out ways to test for it. I think the point Robert is making is that we are only explaining things that we ask for and only doing so after the collective effort of mankind develops the technology necessary for the questions we ask, so shouldn't we ask more relevant questions (about life)?
The scientist calls the things in the universe "crap." This is indicitive of people's dismissal of nature. I have an inkling that humans used to rever nature and not think of it as crap that is the result of a series of accidents and happenstances, as is the trend today. People revel in the explanation of natural things, but at first thought question what material advancements it may bring them.
So, if the scientific method is what dictates the future state, the scientific method is 'progressed' by whatever human inquiry demands, and this combination of things fills the "god hole," are we just left in a spinning test tube for the people at the top?
People rarlely understand all of the intricacies of their own religion. My guess is that few have actually thought about the higgs in a way that is not ignorant glorification of this endless magnification of the microcosmic in order to understand the macrocosimic that is colloquially referred to as the scientific method. Bertrand Russell says in The Problems of Philosophy that,
" Philosophy, like all other studies, aims primarily at knowledge. The knowledge it aims at is the kind of knowledge which gives unity and system to the body of the sciences, and the kind which results from a critical examination of the grounds of our convictions, prejudices, and beliefs. But it cannot be maintained that philosophy has had any very great measure of success in its attempts to provide definite answers to its questions. If you ask a mathematician, a mineralogist, a historian, or any other man of learning, what definite body of truths has been ascertained by his science, his answer will last as long as you are willing to listen. But if you put the same question to a philosopher, he will, if he is candid, have to confess that his study has not achieved positive results such as have been achieved by other sciences. It is true that this is partly accounted for by the fact that, as soon as definite knowledge concerning any subject becomes possible, this subject ceases to be called philosophy, and becomes a separate science. The whole study of the heavens, which now belongs to astronomy, was once included in philosophy; Newton's great work was called 'the mathematical principles of natural philosophy'. Similarly, the study of the human mind, which was a part of philosophy, has now been separated from philosophy and has become the science of psychology. Thus, to a great extent, the uncertainty of philosophy is more apparent than real: those questions which are already capable of definite answers are placed in the sciences, while those to which, at present, no definite answer can be given, remain to form the residue which is called philosophy."
It is almost punching you in the face; "Quod est inferius est sicut quod est superius, et quod est superius est sicut quod est inferius, ad perpetranda miracula rei unius." We are proving the ancient pagan beliefs to be true. I heard Michio Kaku (just so you know this guy is a state propagandist) claim in a video that the universe prior to the big bang was a geometrical constant (he says it is a crystal; all crystals are geometric constants). How could we know that? More importantly, does that shape have resemble a Platonic or Archimedean Solid? There is research that says the universe is shaped like a dodecahedron...after all (Plato was right...cough)... Implications of which are staggering...I'll refer you to my quote of Russell again.
We are way off course. The kind of ignorant celebrations surrounding I see not as healthy.
I hope this made sense.
Relevant:
The Production Of Science. This Week in Liberty, Episode 3. Guest: Amelia (LifeIsHowItIs).
b
"As in a kaleidoscope, the constellation of forces operating in the system as a whole is ever changing." - Ludwig Lachmann
"When A Man Dies A World Goes Out of Existence" - GLS Shackle
I like how the girl says it is, "hard to imagine a scenario where the LHC is created by the free market..." and that she, "can't see a use for it other than pure scientific inquiry."
ha
Wat is an atom?
“Since people are concerned that ‘X’ will not be provided, ‘X’ will naturally be provided by those who are concerned by its absence.""The sweetest of minds can harbor the harshest of men.”
http://voluntaryistreader.wordpress.org