DISCOVERY OF NEW METHODOLOGIES OF SCIENTIFIC PRINCIPLES
A paper by Dr Emmanuel George Cefai
1------Discovery must not be attached to empirical observation and experiment only.
Although there must always be in every discovery an empirical fact or facts that are supportive of the said discovery, yet the discovery itself normally lies beyond the mere observation and/or experiment of the empirical and the ‘rote’ transcription thereof.
2------For philosophy is and must be at the basis of all the foundations of Science. If we were to dig further and further down the foundations of Science, we will always find that the foundations proper lie in the philosophy rather than in the science. [That is if we today make the distinction between the two; a hall mark of our civilization which was generally not so pronounced in the Ancient civilizations].
3---------Philosophy then is the key and finally the be all and end all of Science. From the foundations the building is determined; not the other way round. So from Philosophy, Science be determined; not the other way round. In other works we shall manifest how a) Philosophy clearly explains the beginning of all, and in the process and as a consequence removes the Big Bang; b) Philosophy points out to the inherent carbon-print of life which is to be immortal not mortal, as hammer-blows, chiefly from the environment round it degrade it and c) Philosophy will manifest that all Principles are proportional, related and on the same genealogical tree (just like a human genealogical tree) irrespective of subject, topic, just one civilization.
4-------I therefore propose a Threefold Methodology of Discovery in Science namely :
Principles can be enunciated thus :
Either
The phenomenon coincides with the assertion of the Principle itself – therefore in this case and accordingly sheer and mere Observation and Experiment will be the equivalent : identity[1] of the Assertion : Enunciation of the Principle itself
Or
The Phenomenon obtained by Observation and Experiment has Noun Terms that are as proportional to each other – in this case the Assertion : Enunciation of the Proportion between these Noun Terms and the Assertion : Enunciation of the Principle itself are as equivalent : identities[2]
Or
The Principle is obtained : asserted : enunciated on the basis of Proportio ex Proportio q.v.
These I term as the Three Alternative Methods of Enunciation of Principles et q.v.
As in to the Three Alternative Methods of Enunciation of Principles et. all these three methodologies are separate from each other.
5--------I must assert that any discovery made or to be made must logically fall in one (or more, considering their equivalence) of these Threefold Methods of Methodology of Discovery in Science.
6------- For let us consider this :
In one scenario : we have an Evolution that is ever-increasing, ever-differentiating, without any Limit to ever-increase - that much we assert – and therefore and in as direct proportion without any Limit as to what it will contain. In fact our brain clearly points out that globally Evolution must contain all
In so doing Evolution globally – and it is in this way that we must retain Evolution – must contain all
In the second scenario : A Scientist is given total freedom without Limit to propound theories – one after the other in ever-increase – not necessarily in the same road as Evolution but globally arriving at that same Whole that is Evolution
In other words there is an exact equivalent : identity between scenario One and scenario Two : in other words too any scientist is encouraged to put forth any ‘theory’ – which when – and it will certainly – only on just a matter of time – remain a ‘theory’ no more but become ‘fact’ on Evolution eventually crossing the same path and ‘endorsing’ it – that he wants provided that it is always supported by a minimum of empirical facts, facts obtained through the Bacon’s Observation and Experiment.
7-----As can be seen from this short paper there are changes in the methodology of discovery, but more than that the changes must be in the spirit of discovery, namely, that that the Assertion counts, not proof. [‘Proof’ is here to be understood as ‘the rigorous proof’ required by science since Renaissance times at least]
8------I augur and propose that the new methodology of scientific discovery and the new spirit of Assertion not proof will be the Dawn and Renaissance of a vast enunciation of Principles such enough as to advance Science at exponential rates – not just multiple rates – at what Science is doing today.
9--------But more than that, there must be yet another change in mentality : namely opening up the era and process and excitement of discovery to all nations, especially those that unfortunately are considered as lagging behind the others (like certain Third World countries) in these discoveries, at least in the historical quantum and tradition of civilized discovery.
10-------And more than that, the process of scientific discovery not only must be opened up to all the States and Nations but to all races and individuals on Earth.
Possibly too it is preferable to extricate Science from some (at least) of its jargon.
[1] In terms of the Principle of Equivalent : Identity q.v.
[2] In terms of the Principle of Equivalent : Identity q.v.
Although there must always be in every discovery an empirical fact or facts that are supportive of the said discovery, yet the discovery itself normally lies beyond the mere observation and/or experiment of the empirical and the ‘rote’ transcription thereof.
2------For philosophy is and must be at the basis of all the foundations of Science. If we were to dig further and further down the foundations of Science, we will always find that the foundations proper lie in the philosophy rather than in the science. [That is if we today make the distinction between the two; a hall mark of our civilization which was generally not so pronounced in the Ancient civilizations].
3---------Philosophy then is the key and finally the be all and end all of Science. From the foundations the building is determined; not the other way round. So from Philosophy, Science be determined; not the other way round. In other works we shall manifest how a) Philosophy clearly explains the beginning of all, and in the process and as a consequence removes the Big Bang; b) Philosophy points out to the inherent carbon-print of life which is to be immortal not mortal, as hammer-blows, chiefly from the environment round it degrade it and c) Philosophy will manifest that all Principles are proportional, related and on the same genealogical tree (just like a human genealogical tree) irrespective of subject, topic, just one civilization.
4-------I therefore propose a Threefold Methodology of Discovery in Science namely :
Principles can be enunciated thus :
Either
The phenomenon coincides with the assertion of the Principle itself – therefore in this case and accordingly sheer and mere Observation and Experiment will be the equivalent : identity[1] of the Assertion : Enunciation of the Principle itself
Or
The Phenomenon obtained by Observation and Experiment has Noun Terms that are as proportional to each other – in this case the Assertion : Enunciation of the Proportion between these Noun Terms and the Assertion : Enunciation of the Principle itself are as equivalent : identities[2]
Or
The Principle is obtained : asserted : enunciated on the basis of Proportio ex Proportio q.v.
These I term as the Three Alternative Methods of Enunciation of Principles et q.v.
As in to the Three Alternative Methods of Enunciation of Principles et. all these three methodologies are separate from each other.
5--------I must assert that any discovery made or to be made must logically fall in one (or more, considering their equivalence) of these Threefold Methods of Methodology of Discovery in Science.
6------- For let us consider this :
In one scenario : we have an Evolution that is ever-increasing, ever-differentiating, without any Limit to ever-increase - that much we assert – and therefore and in as direct proportion without any Limit as to what it will contain. In fact our brain clearly points out that globally Evolution must contain all
In so doing Evolution globally – and it is in this way that we must retain Evolution – must contain all
In the second scenario : A Scientist is given total freedom without Limit to propound theories – one after the other in ever-increase – not necessarily in the same road as Evolution but globally arriving at that same Whole that is Evolution
In other words there is an exact equivalent : identity between scenario One and scenario Two : in other words too any scientist is encouraged to put forth any ‘theory’ – which when – and it will certainly – only on just a matter of time – remain a ‘theory’ no more but become ‘fact’ on Evolution eventually crossing the same path and ‘endorsing’ it – that he wants provided that it is always supported by a minimum of empirical facts, facts obtained through the Bacon’s Observation and Experiment.
7-----As can be seen from this short paper there are changes in the methodology of discovery, but more than that the changes must be in the spirit of discovery, namely, that that the Assertion counts, not proof. [‘Proof’ is here to be understood as ‘the rigorous proof’ required by science since Renaissance times at least]
8------I augur and propose that the new methodology of scientific discovery and the new spirit of Assertion not proof will be the Dawn and Renaissance of a vast enunciation of Principles such enough as to advance Science at exponential rates – not just multiple rates – at what Science is doing today.
9--------But more than that, there must be yet another change in mentality : namely opening up the era and process and excitement of discovery to all nations, especially those that unfortunately are considered as lagging behind the others (like certain Third World countries) in these discoveries, at least in the historical quantum and tradition of civilized discovery.
10-------And more than that, the process of scientific discovery not only must be opened up to all the States and Nations but to all races and individuals on Earth.
Possibly too it is preferable to extricate Science from some (at least) of its jargon.
[1] In terms of the Principle of Equivalent : Identity q.v.
[2] In terms of the Principle of Equivalent : Identity q.v.
Archived Documents
|
|
|