After “The Answer”
The Philosophy of the Damned
The task is not so much to see what no one yet has seen, but to think what no one has yet thought about that which everyone sees. (Arthur Schopenhauer, 1818)
In the hearts of the masses lay a belief that the reality they see is pretty much all that exists. And they believe this notion because the very people they’ve given authority to know these things have led them to believe it. Just as they have led us to believe that much of our reality is, and may always remain, an eternal mystery ̶ what Niels Bohr called "intrinsically indeterminate" and thus "unknowable". And this is all done with considerable dogmatic conviction: "Bohr insisted"1
If it weren’t for this eternal mystery of our existence, both Religion and Science and, indeed, the entire educational industry, would be out of business. And because they are definitely “in business”, they must adhere to the principles of business; namely, self-preservation and self-perpetuation. That is, staying in business.
So when the truth comes along that all reality is so simple that it could be understood by an untutored child, or simply in a song; and that all that’s required is untying some of the “knots” in our understanding, then what would be the predictable reaction from these authorities?
But let it be known: the most complex aspect of your reality is seeing reality. And the reason is because we cannot see how it’s always changing into something else and becoming something new every evolving moment. We ‘feel’ this change all the time, in actuality. And the reason that it seems so complex is because instead of feeling it, we tend to see it first in its own reality – which is not the order in which it’s presented to us. Seeing is a time consuming complex process which has only recently begun to shed its secrets. And the panorama of vision it provides is only a limited (finite) reproduction, or ‘replay’, of what’s actually there – which is definitely not finite (see the knot in our language?).
Einstein was one of the first to see it; that there’s no other organic option: our actuality is a four-dimensional space-time continuum providing both a finite and an “unbound” reality.
Now observing reality takes away its four-dimensional motion in the same exact way that photographing it takes away its three dimensional depth. For both are the product of transduction, the universal process of energy transformation. This result comes to the scientists from every direction but one: direct observation.
But at the frontier of neurobiology, is the resounding proof that there is no such thing as direct observation. Vision is a timely reproduction of reality that ultimately changes continuous wave-fields into discontinuous parts, particles, or ‘bits’ of information. Only in this ‘quantum state’ can information get into the brain. Think of discontinuous steps instead of a continuous ramp. What we actually see with the eyes is grossly incomplete!
There’s no other option: “the finite realm” of the observed universe depends on a transfinite realm of a more substantive world to create and sustain it. And, if all goes well, to understand it. The physicists have been putting this interpretation off for over a century now, since Einstein’s fourth dimension also required it.
But rather than take this approach to physical reality, the scientists opted to sacrifice physical reality, or at least, the deterministic, thus logical, substantive world. Only the observed world can remain in three finite dimensions. There is no reality but quantum reality. The quantum-particle physicists insist.
Relativity, determinism, logic, substance, and physical reality itself: all sacrificed in order to maintain three dimensional finitism, the essence of a quantum reality, and the philosophy of those condemned to live in it.
So, as Karl Marx would have said when facing such a conundrum, “Who Benefits”?2 Is it everyman, or his ‘tool-become-master’, Science? One view puts Science at the center of the scene as the universal standard of size and time (USST), an enormously hubristic notion (“Man is the measure of all things”). The other view puts everyman, not as an insignificant spark in some eternal darkness, but back at the center of a completely self-referential world; and not just mentally, but physically.
Perhaps quantum reality is how it should be, because the four-dimensional substantive world may well be too psychologically upsetting, despite the fact that, in my humble opinion, it's the result of the most powerful epistemology ever devised. But it just rubs modern man’s sense of credulity and self-love the wrong way. Plus it would be rather cataclysmic to the static quo of ‘official culture’.
We don’t directly see ourselves spinning into and away from the sun at roughly 1000 miles per hour as we travel around it in our yearly 1000 miles per minute trek. These motions are known to us through deductive reasoning, not just inductive science. And we still say to ourselves that the sun ‘rises’ and ‘sets’ when it does no such thing. So we not only have a visual problem but a language problem in our reasoning.
The point is that it takes a long time to overcome the falsehoods our eyes and our belief systems and a ‘living language’ dictate to us. And the biggest falsehood of all is still with us today, alive and well in Science’s great big finite workshop. And it concerns that eternal enigma we call weight.
What do you actually weigh when you step on a scale? If we see, hear, touch, taste and smell a world “out there”, then why do we weigh our lofty selves “In Here”? What’s wrong with our thinking? Or is it our language? Or both?
So we have got some work to do on ‘our way of thought’.
Horgan, End of Science, p.85, in an interview with David Bohm.