This is part of an article series called “key concepts” wherein I define key concepts I often refer to.
________
"There
were walls around all his thoughts, and he seemed utterly unaware of them,
though he was perpetually hiding behind them." - Shevek in Ursula
Le Guin's novel, The Dispossessed.
____________
Please watch the 1 minute video below then come back to the article. Unless you've seen it already. In that case skip it.
From zazzle store |
One of Thomas Kuhn's opening statements in "Structure of Scientific
Revolutions" is that our mind map of science is incomplete due to
it being informed primarily by achievement. Kuhn: "The man who takes
historic fact seriously must suspect that science does not tend toward the
ideal that our image of its cumulativeness has suggested. Perhaps it is another
sort of enterprise." Kuhn argues that scientific advancement is generated exclusively via paradigm destruction. Ideas displacing other ideas is Science's mode of being. Because Science is so directly predicated on paradigms shifting, the key to understanding Kuhn's argument is to understand paradigms.
The purpose of any given paradigm is to dictate the boundaries of what entities exist. This reductionist approach to reality was born from necessity from the very beginning. When Fidanza set out to gain a granular understanding of nature he was faced with the question of what is worth studying. There is an infinite amount of things. Without value judgments made about what things matter there is no reason to study one thing over another. From a purely scientific perspective, crossing small pox with polio to make a lethal bio-weapon is a legitimate pursuit. It is some sort of morality that tells us this is a bad thing. Kuhn explains how once any given field establishes certain facts the outer edges of that field's paradigm contract. The contractive pressure creates convention. The convention is handed down to students. These are story legacies in the form of textbooks. The textbooks are downstream of a boundary setting enterprise emerging from moral hierarchies. So Science is a moral myth. Kuhn drives a truck through the romanticized view that science is the process of uncovering ever-increasingly refined truths or that it brings about an infinitely upward pointing progress curve. Instead science is a story about what we think matters. Its evolution into the collective cultural context is resonant with archaic motifs of initiation. The paradigm shift is a death rebirth cycle.
The purpose of any given paradigm is to dictate the boundaries of what entities exist. This reductionist approach to reality was born from necessity from the very beginning. When Fidanza set out to gain a granular understanding of nature he was faced with the question of what is worth studying. There is an infinite amount of things. Without value judgments made about what things matter there is no reason to study one thing over another. From a purely scientific perspective, crossing small pox with polio to make a lethal bio-weapon is a legitimate pursuit. It is some sort of morality that tells us this is a bad thing. Kuhn explains how once any given field establishes certain facts the outer edges of that field's paradigm contract. The contractive pressure creates convention. The convention is handed down to students. These are story legacies in the form of textbooks. The textbooks are downstream of a boundary setting enterprise emerging from moral hierarchies. So Science is a moral myth. Kuhn drives a truck through the romanticized view that science is the process of uncovering ever-increasingly refined truths or that it brings about an infinitely upward pointing progress curve. Instead science is a story about what we think matters. Its evolution into the collective cultural context is resonant with archaic motifs of initiation. The paradigm shift is a death rebirth cycle.
Image credit: public domain (publicdomainvectors.org) |
There is a study about playing
cards discussed in Structure of Scientific Revolutions.
The story goes like this: Bruner and Postman showed subjects playing cards one
by one for a brief period. Most of the playing cards fit to the standard four suits categories. But some were anomalous; a black 4 of hearts for
instance. The subjects for the most part did not see the anomalous cards. As
the researchers increased the amount of time each participant could see each
card some people began to notice certain odd cards. But in general they still
could not identify the true color of the card. Some even entered a cognitively
dissonant state, seeing cards with colored borders. Finally when the anomalous
cards were recognized the majority of participants could then easily identify
all the cards. The study is one of many arguments demonstrating that until a paradigm is destroyed in favor of the anomalous, the anomalous goes largely undetected. An important note to make about this study with the cards is that some participants never succeeded in overcoming their
cognitive dissonance.
1546 map of the world by Pierre Desceliers - source: https://nla.gov.au/nla.obj-231279715/ |
The adverse effects of Scientism's paradigm isn't confined to the laboratory. Ever look at maps used by Europeans
who first came to Canada? They were inaccurate but somehow enough. In consultation with indigenous nations the maps were
refined in no small part by way of stories; legends of great rivers and
mountains and paradisiacal land in the west. The explorers did not dismiss the stories. They pursued them; through hunger, cold, sickness and thirst with nothing guiding them but scribbles on birch barks and often less. Try after try
over several generations they failed to find China. Each failure refined their
maps until they eventually did find paradise at the end of the world and renamed it British Columbia. The lesson to take away here is the same one learned from studying the structure of scientific revolutions. The map is not the territory.
How does this relate to music? The contractive pressure of scientism has squeezed out the existence of something that is central to understanding a power in music. A power that I am insisting is necessary to recognize; an ability to heal and build bridges. If this power is to be surfaced into a wider cultural context it must be placed on the spectrum of possible existing entities. Music is a moon walking bear.
Further reading:
- A History of Canada in Ten Maps: Epic Stories of Charting a Mysterious Land - Adam Shoalts
- Death on Mars: The Discovery of a Planetary Nuclear Massacre - Dr. John E. Brandenburg
- The Structure of Scientific Revolutions - Thomas S. Kuhn
- The Dispossessed - Ursula Le Guin
- Six Signs of Scientism - Susan Haack
More info:
A really engaging read! I've missed reading your stuff. Totally agree that there are people who are dogmatic about science and dismissive of other ways of knowing. I also agree that paradigms can lead us to take in information selectively and fail even to perceive input that creates cognitive dissonance for us (which is a finding of social scientific research). Science can't explain everything. But to me, science is a valid way of knowing among others, and different ways of knowing are suited to different kinds of problems and questions. To me, rejecting Scientism is entirely compatible with applying scientific knowledge to those kinds of problems and issues that it is equipped to help us with, including life-threatening ones. People's uses of scientific knowledge save lives every day, and they also claim lives every day. So science cannot let us off the hook of ethical and political discernment and decision-making.
ReplyDelete