Science Defined Under Religious Capitalism

It is simply true that democracy is the political philosophy of science and natural philosophy.  That being the case, one wonders why the American scientific community has been able and willing to sit by and watch calmly as the first formal democracy in the modern world has been largely destroyed by the Bush administration and the corporate aristocracy it serves.

There are not many options from which to choose in explaining this mindless disconnect.  Either most scientists in America have been poorly raised to have little knowledge of the intimate role of science in cultural evolution (particularly in the re-emergence of democracy in America) or they are simply too frightened to speak out for democracy under religious capitalism's dominion.  In America, both explanations fit nicely into the truth.

American scientists are both shallowly (pragmatically) educated and they are compromised into silence by a capitalism that thrives on eliminating those who do not enthusiastically accept its dominion and the notion that science and scientific knowledge ought be subservient to marketplace demands and political ideologies.  Either way, the driving influences in post-WWII American cultural de-evolution have been ignorance and fear, the hallmarks of despotism not democracy.

That being the case, it is worthwhile to consider the various types of scientists and the science they do because it helps clarify what science is and what it is not.  It also helps clarify who is a scientist and who is not.

In a world dependent upon science and technology to keep itself glued together and in touch, one does not abandon science for religion because some idiot thinks he has a way to generate revenue by cloning people.  What we are looking at here are the differences between extraordinary science, ordinary science and stupid "science."

Extraordinary Science

Extraordinary science emerges when the knowledge of the past is recognized as providing inadequate answers to questions about the world.  What makes extraordinary science "extraordinary" is its establishment of a new way to think about the world and a new world view, a way to think that better answers questions than the past could answer and answer questions that the past could not even ask (1).

In the beginning, God said, "Let there be light" ... and there was Socrates and friends providing the descriptive frameworks of inductive thought (in answering What questions).  It was more than a miracle, it was a revolution.  Almost overnight, the stars and planets were given names so they could be known, the plants and animals were given names so they could be known, and the people chose democracy so that they could be known to each other.  For the first time on earth, humans actually knew something, by accepting that life was real and could be known.

When God next said, "Let there be light" ... there was Isaac Newton and friends providing the mechanistic frameworks of deductive thought (in answering How questions).  It was more than a miracle, it was a revolution.  Almost overnight, the earth took its proper place orbiting the sun, science and natural philosophy were reborn and, once again, the people chose democracy so they could make the world modern and more human.

When God next said, "Let there be light" ... there was Albert Einstein and friends providing the systematic frameworks of reductive thought (in answering Why questions).  It was more than a miracle, it was a revolution.  Almost overnight, energy and mass were united and the universe became one, the world was reduced to the informational level of organization in explaining the physical world, the biological world and the cultural world.  Once again, the people will need to choose democracy so they can make the world whole.

Ordinary Science

Ordinary science emerges following the work of extraordinary science and the emergence of a larger, more refined approach to thought and a larger, more refined world view.  Within new world views, there is always ample room for creative science and ample work for ordinary science in filling in the details.

Following Socrates and the high culture of Greece, science was lost for nearly two millennia.  Rome decided to rule the western world in the name of a supernatural Christ, the Greek libraries were burned and science survived in Arab hands until the 11th century Crusades.  The return of Greek knowledge as booty from the Holy Lands ultimately nourished the Renaissance, the Reformation, the rebirth of science and the Newtonian deductive revolution.

Following Newton, it would take ordinary science two centuries to fill in the details, only to discover anomalies and inconsistencies in a world driven by force.  During that time period, deductive thought made its way into biology (Darwin) and medicine (Henle, Koch) and psychology (Freud) to establish the basis for the modern world.

Following Einstein, it has taken ordinary science one century to fill in the details, only to discover a conceptual one world embracing life from the informational level to the material whole.  During that time period, reductive thought has made its way into biology and medicine and psychology to expose the human one world beneath all cultural surfaces.  It is now possible to consider a world that is more than modern.  It is possible to create a world that is honestly human.

Stupid Science

In spite of the fact that science is entirely conceptual (1), very few American scientists are raised to be aware of that fact.  Because it is a fact, what we know about one area of inquiry must be consistent with what we know about all other areas of inquiry.  Our conceptual world must fit together in the interest of making sense, logical and common.

This requirement for internal consistency leaves a good deal of American science in the intellectual crapper, particularly that "science" that is driven by the profit motive.  This requirement also explains why larger viewpoints (demanding internal consistency) have been downplayed in American science for half a century on the path to stupid science.

Capitalism has made American science overly pragmatic and overly concerned with technological applications that fuel the profit motive.  Of far more importance is the application of science to meaningful explanations of our evolutionary reality, e.g., where we came from, where we are going and why we are here.  All in all, capitalism has made American science shallow in thought, mediocre in action and stupid by all but capitalism's marketplace standards.

Case in Point

Consider, for example, Francis Crick, who conducted a bit of extraordinary science in discovering the molecular structure of DNA (2).  In doing so, Crick opened the doors to molecular biology, molecular genetics and evolutionary biology at the molecular level of organization.  This is as close to fundamentalism as one can get in science, i.e., to produce knowledge that is fundamentally useful across multiple disciplines, even to disciplines that do not yet exist.

Crick knew enough about science to know that "In contrast to the popular conception supported by newspapers and mothers of scientists, a goodly number of scientists are not only narrow-minded and dull, but also just stupid."

There is a reason for this.  Many "scientists" are not scientists at all.  They are merely people who claim to do "science" for a living.  As such, their concern in life is not so much with the "science" but with the "living," which requires keeping one's employment.  Science provides a world in which we compete for better ideas.  Capitalism provides a world in which we compete for raw survival.

Crick viewed many scientists as "cantankerous fools who unfailingly backed the wrong horses."  There is a reason for this.  Again, it is because many "scientists" perceive it their job to honor the scientific status quo and preserve the viewpoints which maintain their employment.

"One could not be a successful scientist without realizing that"  very-often-complete compromise of scientific values.  Extraordinary science is fueled by recognition of past and present shortcomings.  This is difficult for ordinary scientists to recognize without taking risks and appearing intelligent.

Consider, for example, the current state of clinical cancer research in America, where therapy is not aimed at causes (i.e., genomic defects) but at symptoms (i.e., cancer cells), where therapy does not "cure" anything in the traditional sense, and where therapeutic response rates are mediocre at best.  In other words, current approaches to cancer therapy simply do not make any sense from viewpoints that embrace the cancer problem as a whole (3).

While current approaches keep the money coming in for clinical medicine, there is, in fact, no historical precedent for the emergence of cures when therapy is directed at symptoms.  In other words, current approaches to cancer therapy are stupid in a very fundamental way, largely due to the mindless demands and impositions of capitalism.

America has become a country fascinated with the logical thought of forensic science on television and, at the same time, appalled at the notion of intelligent thought in public life (4).  This is because value-laden, knowledgeable thought is fascinating to watch in action, working its way toward an honest truth.  It is also a clear threat to every known element of capitalism's greed-driven program.

All through the 1970s, medical scientists from high places like Harvard and Yale (the places that also "eduated" George W. Bush) were touring U.S. universities, encouraging scientists to become "entrepreneurs," to go forth in search of corporate support, to compromise their own research interests by doing what corporate America thinks to be of importance, i.e., turning profits.  It was all quite integral to capitalism's "dumbing down" of America across the board, starting at the top of the intellectual heap.

Like everything else in the cultural world, being an extraordinary scientist distills down to mostly to personal values and viewpoints.  For most extraordinary scientists, this typically comes down to honesty, integrity, freedom and a pursuing love of knowledge.  That explains why democracy is the political philosophy of science and natural philosophy.  They speak to the same values, as the American scientific community does not see.

For many ordinary scientists and for most stupid scientists, personal values, in poll after poll, come down to "comfort" and "security" for themselves and their families.  The irony under capitalism is that the provision of individual security has been the essential bottom line in democracy since Spinoza rekindled interest in the subject in the century before Jefferson.

Over-specialized in meeting capitalism's demands, many scientists live in tiny little worlds defined by corporate needs.  Under-educated in meeting democracy's demands, many scientists are unable to be of assistance to anyone but corporate America.  Capitalism's science is functionally de-cerebrate.

As a result, the scientific community in America is in an utter shambles under capitalism's dominion.  Its members are able to agree upon very little because they know very little about life on the whole.  Science just isn't taught that way.  Capitalism has lined its pockets with the fruits of post-Einstein technology and it has ignored post-Einstein natural philosophy entirely because of its revolutionary message to the world.

What hasn't religious capitalism compromised?  It has compromised the concepts of human rights, democracy, and government of, by and for the people.  It has compromised America's contract with the people.  It has compromised America's international relationships.  It has compromised American morality and America's reputation in the eyes of the world.  It has compromised everything that made America special to thoughtful, caring people everywhere.

To its own detriment, and inadvertently in the interest of the people, the Bush administration has even compromised Old Testament religion and crony capitalism.  It has even compromised itself by providing itself with no heir apparent for 2008 to carry on the Bush administration's agenda (at least no heir apparent that could win an election) (5).

For lack of love and reason, the Bush administration will pursue its pathetic agenda to the death of religious capitalism and itself.  For that same lack of love and reason, the Bush administration is both unwilling and unable to propagate itself beyond Bush.  There are no other functional illiterates in a position to take his place.

In the biological world, that is an untenable position because it is a terminal position.  So it is also in the cultural world.

Readings

1)  Einstein's Reductive Revolution, Axis of Logic, November 10, 2005.
2)  James D. Watson, The Double Helix: A Personal Account of the Discovery of the Structure of DNA, Touchstone, ISBN: 074321630X, 2001.
3)  Capitalism, Cancer and Intellectual Corruption, Axis of Logic, September 24, 2005.
4)  America's Fascination with Logical Thought, Axis of Logic, July 22, 2005.
5)  Peter Preston, The vice that dooms Bush, The Guardian UK, November 14, 2005.

� Copyright 2005 by AxisofLogic.com

Dr. Gerry Lower is an Axis of Logic Columnist, residing in Eugene, Oregon. He can be reached at: tisland@blackhills.com.

Biography and more articles by Dr. Gerry Lower