Is mainstream science stupid? In a narrow but critical way, the simple answer is, “Yes.”
Ignorance as an act of faith
We take for granted that science is based on hard evidence, facts and experiments. That’s how science sold itself as the source of truth, and it’s a trust we all depend on.
But we’re wrong.
A pilar of science is based — shakily — on faith, and it’s no more trustworthy than any other religion.
Way back in 1981, David Wallechinsky and Irving Wallace called it out in The People’s Almanac. Scientism, the set of beliefs on which modern science rests, makes it as much a religion as any other.
I covered some of this in Big Things We Don’t Know, but there’s one scientific belief so far off base — and so righteously adhered to — it pisses me off every time I catch whiff of it.
Mainstream Science — Stupid, Arrogant or Both?
In a Scientific American article, the author quotes a “prominent physicist” at a recent conference:
“These ideas must be true even without experimental testimony in their favor, because thousands of physicists believe in them and it is difficult to imagine that such a large community of mathematically-gifted scientists would be wrong.”
If that doesn’t make your hair stand on end, jump back in history to when scientific fundamentalism sent Galleleo and others into prison, hiding and worse because facts discovered disturbed the beliefs harbored by nearly everyone else.
That’s mainstream science being stupid and patting itself on the back for it.
The deliberate ignorance that pisses me off…
It keeps popping up, if you read enough about consciousness, the theory of mind and how brains work. And it’s as if genuflecting to this easily refuted belief is mandatory.
I was reading Anthony Peake’s wrongly titled Is There Life After Death when he trotted it out in the middle of an otherwise enlightening read.
Our brains, he rolled out as if it were established fact, have more than enough capacity to retain a full inventory of everything we’ve ever experienced as memory.
It’s hard to know where to begin with unravelling this blast of mainstream scientific ignorance, but let’s start with this:
Nobody, and I do mean nobody, has the faintest idea what the size of a memory is.
Memory is not a moment in time anymore than life is. Life is an intricate stream of things woven through time, and it doesn’t stop or start. Life’s the isness of everything.
Concocting a notion that it’s measurable is as unscientific as you can get. No facts are involved. It’s all belief, and it has a purpose.
A bad purpose.
Why is mainstream science stupid?
The surprising answer is that mainstream science is stupid because of desperation to dodge anything resembling religion. And they use their own factually unsupported belief system to do it.
What scares the living hell — yes, the religious reference is supposed to be funny — what scares the living hell out of the bulk of established scientists is that something immaterial exists, especially something as ineffable as consciousness.
Mainstream science is so plugged into materialism it might as well change its name. Science needs things to be material, touchable, measurable.
That’s understandable. It’s what science does, but what’s not understandable is intolerance. Mainstream science has plenty of that.
If you don’t buy their beliefs, it’s because you’re a fool, not just someone with a different idea. That makes mainstream science stupid.
As I wrote in What happens when you die?, there are huge pieces of human experience that are not material. They can’t be seen, touched or measured, but we all know they are there.
I’m talking about feelings, thoughts, imagination and dreams.
We all know these fundamental parts of our lives exist. We all take part in them. But none of us has ever seen a feeling or a thought. Imagination and dreams, by definition, are all in our minds but are not material things.
What makes mainstream science stupid is the passionate belief that these things can’t be real because no scientist has ever touched any of them.
Their just bric-a-brac, the scattered, meaningless residue of a machine-like human existence.