Introduction to a work which turned out differently
I initially intended to be a 4-parts essay written for the site truthcontest.com,
"open (sic) contest for the ultimate truth on life and death".
Finally, I wrote many of the diverse ideas in a not-so-structured
way, dispersed into several pages.
Initially considered abstract. The aim of this work is to
provide a detailed analysis of the divide between science and
religion that is assumed by many people on both sides, where
religions either scorn science and claim to bring the sense of life
beyond scientific means; or unilaterally claim compatibility and
hope to unify with it, or distort and hijack it for their own
promotion; while others claim that science is the one truth against
religious views. So if there is only one reality, one truth, what is
it ? A rational analysis of life including some paradoxes, will be
presented, including:
- What are the features of scientific rationality (logical
positivism), why does science communicate so little with
society;
- A metaphyical framework and an initiation to quantum physics
to explain the mind-matter interaction, and allow for the
concepts of afterlife and the supernatural;
- How traces of supernatural phenomena turned out to remain very
limited, and religions and other claimed "supernatural
revelations" did not provide any significant truth on the sense
of life and morality, but were very misleading;
- How this is not so bad because the scientific practice
(observation, reason and technology) can make for it instead to
a large extent: it remains by far the best way to the truth,
and, if further developed in the useful way, understand and
resolve many of the world's troubles.
Introduction: what is your question ?
Hello all. I love exploring the worlds of mathematics, physics, and
some more challenging and crucial issues where the search for truth
can be similarly proceeded through careful analyzing, building
theories and synthetizing.
And you, what do you like ? "Truth contest". Wonderful ! Do you like
truths ? Here you are: 2+2=4. Do you like it ?
Of course, there are much more interesting truths than this. For
example I could tell you about the universe of mathematics, which is
quite wonderful indeed. We can find there endless infinities of
infinities, that can as well be modelized by the same infinity
viewed as forming different structures. There, it has been proven
that any universal truth (in some sense) is provable. Still an open
range of questions with a seemingly absolute meaning are in fact
undecidable (they cannot be proven nor refuted). Some claims about
infinities can be proven undecidable by buiding universes where they
are true, and others one where they are false. But many of such
undecidabilities are themselves unprovable, so that an unprovable
claim can have a fakely finite proof in another universe. Do you
like this ?
Still not ? So, what else do you wish to know ? Do you like to know
about the Big Bang ? how can the universe expand, slow down and
accelerate without having any known center to go from ? How can a
black hole capture light if it cannot emit anything and the light
keeps going upwards from it at the same constant speed (c) ? How can
a particle be at many positions altogether, and how can it be the
same thing as a wave ? How the stars form, shine and explode ?
Still not happy ? What else do you want to know then ? "...the truth
about life and death..." ?
Do you want to know about life on Earth ? How was it possible for
the oceans to form, and for life to develop there for billions of
years before finally conquering the continents ? Do you want to know
how humans appeared and conquered the world ? How did they form
nations and made wars together until finally building a relative
peace, prosperity and economic growth, finally endangering their own
planet ? Do you want to know how could they finally discover all
these things about the universe ? Still not your question ?
OK, I understand you very well. You don't just have questions, you
are facing troubles, the same troubles that so many other people on
this planet faced. First, that you are a concious being, and that
you can't describe the nature of this conciousness which you are, in
the same ways as you can study anything else. Second, you wonder how
the universe and/or the world in which we live can be globally
described and understood, and is there any sort of reason why it is
this way rather than anyway else, and what the f**k dropped you on
this planet. Third, what will happen to you after death, and is
there any way for you to prepare to it. Forth, is there any or
several purpose(s) or missions of your life, either about how to be
happy or for anything else such as a divine will to follow,
and/or any particularly important truth(s) that you need to know for
succeeding it.
These concerns are legitimate. And the problem is, despite all its
wonderful progresses in discovering the truth, science did not seem
to have any available answers to these troubles. Why ? But we will
see that this accusation is not right: important rational
answers can be given already and will be given here. Only the
circumstances and proper efforts were missing to produce and/or
spread such answers previously.
As time went and commonly heard answers remained unsatisfactory, you
could panick and, like millions before you, shout your need for a
"Utimate Truth", as if such a phrasing of a request could make you
deserve (and/or could be of any help for) getting better answers.
Until now, it looked like the only voices offering answers were
those of religions and spiritualities, more or less unchanged since
millenia, quite older than science itself, But, is this old age
of spiritualities a sign of reliability or of sterility, while
science makes much faster progress ?
But unlike science, spiritual voices often contradict each other and
their reliability is unclear, so that you are left with the trouble
to tell the right from the wrong in their teachings.
I was also in this situation. For years I was led to follow
spiritual answers, but my scientific mind was developing and working
in the background, examining what was happening. Thanks to
this, when my faith in spiritual teachings collapsed due to
insisting contrary evidence, I was not completely lost: despite all
the troubles, I could manage to rebuild a consistent and reliable
understanding of all those matters.
This includes the understanding of what is wrong with these
spiritual teachings, and why; why do so many people still believe in
them, and what more essential truths did they fail to discover on
the very issues they claim to answer. How their attractiveness and
appearance of wonderful coherence and reliability, that preserved
them through the ages, is hiding quite a miserable quality of truth
as compared to the now common standards of scientific understanding
(which I finally managed to reach on these issues), once examined
more closely. What are precisely the differences between science and
spirituality, not just the easy and superficial ones that
spiritualities usually raise to put themselves forward, but also
some quite more subtle ones that appear from a scientific
viewpoint, the scientific replies to religions, usually ignored by
"spiritual people", and showing how science can indeed go far beyond
spirituality.
These are so many issues. I will try to explain the main ones, with
a special focus on 2 goals. First, to dismiss a number
of frequent wrong beliefs. Second, to explain important and
still not well-known issues about life, how to give life
better chances to be worth living, and ensure that global progress
will keep going.
Note about references and quotations
A number of quotations and links are used to illustrate and
strengthen some points in this series of texts. These are but what
I had the chance to find in a little web research, that I did not
take much time for. If you know more good references to illustrate
the points, you can please send them to me, that I might include.
But:
- Freely accessible web pages are much prefered than
books to buy
- Don't waste our time suggesting opposite views in hope
to change my mind on important issues, it won't work anyway; I
might exceptionally link to an opposite view on something as I
already did, but not spend time for it. Indeed this is the
fruit of such a research, that I am not the kind of person to
have taken any risk of making here claims that might be wrong,
sorry.
Initially intended plan (not
the more disordered structure it turned out to be)
I : The
Copernician revolution vs the spiritual ego
II. Explaining reason and science
III. Explaining metaphysics
Religion
(unfinished)
Foreseeing and
managing the future (incomplete - see the initially intended
list of ideas at the end of the text on religion)
Back to the Antispirituality
site