Gallio : $b or, The tyranny of science — John Shaqi
Gallio : $b or, The tyranny of scienceSullivan, J. W. N. (John William Navin)
Philosophy
Gallio : $b or, The tyranny of science
Sullivan, J. W. N. (John William Navin)
Science; Science -- Philosophy
The notion that we live in a purposeless universe is so opposed to the
mental habits we have inherited that it is a matter of the greatest
difficulty to bear it constantly in mind. Most of the people who
hold this belief to-day would not do so but for three reasons: the
disillusionment caused by the War, their respect for science, and
their belief that science preaches materialism. As for the War, that
is an experience to which we must accommodate ourselves as best we
may. It is consistent with the belief that man is a developing spirit,
but it is certainly a proof that he is not very far developed. The
respect for science is, I believe, on the whole rather overdone. The
respect is a little excessive even when it relates to mathematical
physics, but it becomes almost absurd when it relates to some other
branches of science. I believe, for instance, that Freud’s form of
psycho-analysis, some forms of behaviourism, and many of the statements
of the eugenists really are as silly as they look. All that they
have in common with such first-class mental activities as physics and
chemistry is the name “science.” It is this name that secures for them
such attention as they get from intelligent people who are not cranks.
But even physics is a more provisional and more human thing than some
romantic references to it would lead one to suppose. Even the tower of
the mathematician, which Mr Bernard Shaw imagines to have been always
unshaken, has been seriously disturbed on more than one occasion. The
student of the history of science will not be too confident even of the
“indubitable certainties” of physics when he reflects on the universal
passion of belief that attached to the notion of a mechanical ether,
for whose present absence from the universe some men of science are
still inconsolable, and when he reflects on the fate that has overtaken
that “most perfect and perfectly established law”, Newton’s law of
gravitation. There are no indubitable certainties in science, a fact
that we who are contemporary with the destruction of the Newtonian
system are not likely to forget. There are only provisional hypotheses.
It may even be, as Mr J. B. S. Haldane prophesies, that physiology
will one day invade and destroy mathematical physics, by which somewhat
dark saying I suppose phenomena mathematically may be given up. Whether
he means that or not, it is a possibility, as Professor Eddington has
hinted. The scientific practitioner usually treats his hypotheses as
tools, but to the layman they become dogmas. One is led to believe
this by seeing that many of those who accept materialism on what they
suppose to be scientific evidence are rendered acutely unhappy by their
belief. A truer knowledge of the status of scientific theories would
render this agony unnecessary. There are people with a natural leaning
towards materialism, and science, preferably somewhat old-fashioned
science, will give them quite sufficient grounds to indulge their
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account