[ the main topic page ] [ the main page ]

Kaiti Kagaraki - PhD,
Political Sciences and Law Stylist, writer,
Athens, Greece

The True Scientific Picture of the World – Modern Philosophical Approaches
The Damage to the World’s Image from Non-Scientific Approaches

If a retrospective look was to be taken through the thoughts but also the texts of man’s continuous search, it would most certainly lead us to what we call Philosophy. The study of philosophy is an ecumenical heritage that assists us in the approach of knowledge and truth, directing men in finding their true identity and fulfillment. Man reaches practical philosophy by taking theory into action. As Socrates said “philosophy is a daily practical occupation”, that helps us understand what we observe around us, giving it a purpose and a meaning.

The fundaments of social prosperity depend on the natural and spiritual prosperity of the people forming it, but also on the possibility of each one of them to perceive the world, on their spiritual level and on their culture in general.

Men will succeed through philosophical examination and attitude. This interest for “wisdom” is acquired via intellectual interests, questions, search and investigation of the solutions, through the method called dialectical, that the philosopher Socrates was the first one to use. Every thought is the beginning of a basic solution to the facts. By studying, we acquire a scientific thought that leads us to the ways that we will use in order to reach a solution to the resulting problems. This is mainly achieved after education, which opens new pathways to philosophical thinking, teaching the true values, the ethics within the boundaries of human thought. Thus, we get to “know” the object of our search in different ways. With our logic we acquire more knowledge in psychology, history, sociology etc. for a correct application of the inductive and reductive analysis.

Western sciences are mainly based on Ancient Greek philosophy. Their harmonious interaction is secured by studying and using it.

In my view, a good thing would be not to have clear boundaries between them. Philosophical thinking helps scientific knowledge, the admirable result of which confirms the power of philosophy.

Certainly, from time to time, there have been disputes and controversy which altered, up to a point, the idea that we have of modern philosophy. Is the natural world what we really are conscious of or what we think exists? Nevertheless by “Loving the things of the mind in a simple manner …” there is a risk that we might alter the role of philosophy and its scientific application. Daniel Dennett maintained that “there is no such thing as philosophy - free science; there is only science whose philosophical baggage is taken on board without examination”!!

Scientific theories and applications are the practical result of the coalescence of the two, in order to complete the correct, real picture of the world.

The philosophical approach and the processing of contemporary problems of science must be in discourse with one another. Unfortunately, nowadays, people, with all these numerous and difficult problems that have resulted, are indifferent towards spiritual awakening as a tool to resolve these problems. Thus, on the one hand, there is the view that the influence of philosophical thinking is much decreased in the modern world, as the interest of the people has turned towards other, more practical sciences.

However, on the other hand, there is the opinion that there is no crisis of philosophy per se, only a “change” of the times and the mores. The modern world, living in the society of matter, of consumer goods, technology, advertising, is indifferent towards the spiritual aspect of it all. Nevertheless, matter results from the spirit and not vice versa. Here is an abstract, a poetic picture used by the writer D.H. Lawrence, presenting our issue here, in an admirable way: “we are bleeding at the roots because we are cut off from the earth and sun and stars. Love has become a grinning mockery because, poor blossom, we plucked it from its stem on the Tree of Life and expected it to keep on blooming in our civilized vase on the table.”

Young people mainly, at the start, are more curious about nature than with the idea of philosophy of Science. If they wonder, however, on the idea of the Science that they wish to serve, they will admit that its whole view of the world is based on philosophy.

Philosophy is not out of the world, because it is in the nature of man and helps him in his quest for truth and in the practical fulfilment of his objectives. Either way, Philosophy starts with a question and stops with the answer.

It is certain that we are facing difficult times. Truths and ideas are refuted; states that were powerful in the past fell apart. Men want to satisfy their material and spiritual needs in order to feel secure within a rule of law. Since the Ancient Greek intellectuals and philosophers up to the present date, humanity tries to improve on every level. All consider what they have lost and gained in their path and wish to have accurate and insightful objectives, with the positive solutions available. At that point, the role of philosophy becomes imperative and interventional on the foundation of the freedom of thought and speech.

Human existence is thus enlightened and conscious of its constant need to rely on philosophy, particularly today, when all values are falling apart.

Philosophy is necessary for exercising the spirit and for the promotion of men and their achievements. The aim of all contemporary philosophers is to put themselves at the service of society. Human values such as Truth, Justice, Freedom, Equality of rights, Knowledge of the self must positively affect the life of human kind.

The splitting of science into numerous specialties limited the level of human knowledge, keeping men away from their spiritual horizons. At this point the role of philosophy becomes apparent as philosophy supports scientific thinking and conception, broadening the spirit with natural and metaphysical pathways that pass through the boundaries of thinking and rationalization and reaches the practice of experience.

The clarity of the Greek spirit created the fundamental principles of philosophy and science, and with time it affected science on a worldwide level. This path of science was first traced by the Pre-Socratic philosophers and Aristotle.

However, from 1543 and on, a “scientific revolution”, as one could say, took place, that brought new ideas in physics, astronomy, biology, anatomy, chemistry and other sciences; it lead to the rejection of dogmas that prevailed since ancient times until the Middles Ages, leading also to the foundation of modern science. Nicolaus Copernicus maintained that the Earth revolves around the Sun and Isaac Newton published the theory of gravity; both changed the course of science and were followed by Galileo, Halley, Kepler, Leibniz and Pascal. More recent philosophers also set new foundations to understanding, such as the French Descartes, whose theories constituted a corner stone to the history of philosophy since he was considered a teacher of enlightenment and skepticism. The English Thomas Hobbs was among the first intellectuals – founders of the modern state and political philosophy and Francis Bacon supported new ways for men to take control over nature, thus improving their position for the “Glory of God”, since religion never ceased to play a significant part in the making of society.

The study of history from the point of view of physics, biology, psychology and sociology leads to the observation that these sciences conduced to the full-fledged presence of man in his environment. Observing, thinking, experimenting, and finally confirming, constitute the great base of science and make it stand apart from the other means for knowledge.

Science is a procedure which results in the production of knowledge based on careful observations of phenomena and on the invention of theories that will support these observations and will be confirmed by groups of people from all specialties, genders, ages and ethnic origins.

The study of science as a spiritual and social attempt leads to the understanding of the real picture of the world.

For centuries, the development of science and technology has resulted from the progressive accumulation of knowledge from the Egyptian, Greek, Chinese and Arabic civilizations. Researches made us gain a lot of experience; scientists make great progress leading, many times, to innovations and genius scientific revolutions.

[A parenthesis: I would like to mention that, for mankind to reach this point, the Pythagoreans started it all, who, based on natural law explained with mathematic rule a great category of phenomena. Kepler (17^th century) can be considered as a modern founder of “natural law”. At that time, too, the English Jurist and Philosopher Francis Bacon relies on the experimental (inductive) method as the means to produce broader concepts, upon systematic observation; moreover, he accused Aristotle of having limited science to deductive logics based on the first observations and not on experience (like Descartes, Spinoza and others). John Locke brought the completeness of science, who underlined that the combination of experience and logic is supplemented and perfected with scientific proof].

With time, knowledge endures changes as the quest reveals new horizons demanding the production of new, trustworthy information. Fast scientific evolution offers new ways and new techniques for the confirmation and final implementation of an invention. It is a fact that scientific knowledge is not absolutely determined, thus leaving room for improvement. This latter fact is combined to the other fact, that all scientists do not pursue the same mode of thinking and collection of data.

However, it sometimes happens that the answers to a broad “object of knowledge” are different, when its observation is performed in a laboratory than in its natural environment. Nonetheless, studies and methods may be combined and bring, with further investigation, the final result or evolution. Of course, as a great number of achievements are still valid today unchanged, the challenge for scientists is to ponder whether they should accept the result of their research as definitive or, to decide that even more studies are needed. Thus, science, testing, revision and the occasional maybe rejection of new or older theories never ends with the condition, of course, that the progress of science and scientific research is something much more complex than what most people believe. It is the coalescence of many data leading to great discoveries, with the collaboration of researchers.

The modification of theories and research is a challenge for science as everything evolves and scientific knowledge is always open to new improvements. An indicative example is the formulation of Albert Einstein’s Theory of relativity which does not reject Newton’s pre-existing Law of Motion, but which proves that it is an approach to it, under a more general sense (Generalization of universal gravitation).

Even today, the National Department of Aerodynamics and Space uses Newtonian mechanics to calculate the orbit of satellites. With the everyday acquisition of a wide range of knowledge, clear limits between scientific branches are often annulled. Thus, Physics approaches Chemistry, Astronomy approaches Geology, Chemistry comes closer to Biology and, as a result, new scientific specialties are created such as astrophysics, social biology etc. Aided by technology, all this evolution lead to the construction of perfect scientific instruments which add to the trustworthiness in the results of theories, making us able to perceive phenomena that could not be combined before. For instance, the theory of continental drift was proved to be caused by phenomena that, at first glance, were different between them, such as volcano eruptions, earthquakes in combination with fossil grounds on different continents, the shape of continents, the nature of the outline of the oceans etc.

This fact gives the possibility to scientists to play a double part; which is to use their knowledge in order to offer assistance in matters of public interest. To foresee natural and technological disasters or even to have a consulting part in the prevention of ecological disasters. Also, science can have a social aspect and the spread of scientific information may be vital for progress. By dealing with everyday sectors such as the sector of finance and the ideas of social justice as to the improvement of workers’ salaries for example or equal chances of work irrespective of color and gender.

According to Carl Sagan, the prolific and prized American astronomer and astrophysicist, science is a candle in the dark. It shines a light on the world around us allowing us to see beyond prejudice and fear, beyond ignorance and illusions, beyond the general thinking of our forefathers who justly fought for their survival against fear and the occult and supernatural powers!

The results of the Lisbon strategy must be dedicated to all these men; the European council set it there and decided, among others, on the ways in which we should go on being a society of knowledge. The European educational programmes must be subsidized and promoted, new challenges must be found and the foundations for the training of future scientists.

The decisions in that domain were:

To focus investments and reforms on basic educational issues.

To put lifelong learning in practice.

To secure, with all means possible, the place for these fundamental programmes.

All European countries adopted it, each one on a different level; the difference, though, with the level at the United States was considerable.

The outcome is that today scientific committees are financed for their research propositions. Governments have proved to offer a great part of their funds for research in Universities, industry, national laboratories, research centers, but also to private organizations of public interest.

The scientific picture of the world today is influenced and promoted by many other factors. The most significant is computer science, with the unlimited possibilities it offers. Also, direct communication for exchange of opinions, conclusions, data comparison among scientists but also the simultaneous observation of experiments, conferences and so many more are also very important. However, the speed of diffusion is extremely important: anyone can be informed on and use the data in no time, as compared to other times.

The knowledge of any kind that we can get by using computers is just a small sample of their possibilities; this is why computers have their place in schools where students learn to use them. Nowadays there is no home, company, state department without a computer. Everything that happens in the world from a scientific, political, social, sports, cultural point of view is directly diffused on the internet and computer screens, as well as television screens, changed the picture of the world and made it clearer.

Nevertheless, the true scientific picture of the world today is not always praise-worthy. Very often, in laboratories “inhuman” inventions are made and the world has to face dilemmas on whether we should simply accept scientific achievements. This is a reason why the basic outlines of contemporary scientific thinking and its results must be brought to the surface. Einstein himself had predicted the situation that would prevail and he had said: “It is very important to give people the opportunity to acquire experience from the efforts of scientific research. For each one of us to address to the few specialists in each sector of science is not enough. When knowledge is restricted to a small group, the philosophical spirit is lead to necrosis and this results in spiritual poverty!...”

In addition, scientific deontology is transgressed when animals are used for experiments or when people, without knowing it, become guinea-pigs “for the sake of science”. Besides, numerous significant discoveries are responsible for ecological disasters, infectious diseases, and transmutation of products and for the threat against humankind from the development of mass destruction weapons. And also one should not fail to mention all kinds of espionage that bring down the military, industrial, banking and other secrets, and in our time in particular with all these unbelievable possibilities to transgress computer software and so many others.

The role that philosophy is called to play today is to be put at the service of society and to deal with how science and technique are used by men. Philosophy should be in the first row of worldwide collaboration supporting a multidimensional humanism that will rise from the causes and the results and from the absolute “truth” of scientific achievements.

It is widely known that the conditions for the emergence of science were born in primitive societies in the form of observation and description the natural phenomena and procedures. The first elements of knowledge appeared as the aspects of a direct social practice, which was oriented towards assuring the necessary skills for biological survival of human beings. Observance of the movement of the sun and the stars for example was necessary to the organization of agricultural labour.

Scientific progress opened the way for the liberation of human beings from direct dependence on nature and contributed to the creation of enormous possibilities of transformation of the natural environment. Thus, the way was opened for the creation of abundance of material goods and for the termination of the struggle for the assurance of the necessary means for biological survival of mankind.

Primarily, the development of science was connected to the evolution of individual manual labour and craftsmanship production. The scientist was, at the same time, an artist and an engineer (Leonardo da Vinci, Lomonosov, and Goethe, among others). On the basis of manual labour development, its expansion towards spiritual labour was developed as well as its expansion amongst empirical and theoretical knowledge; empirical knowledge acquired a productive significance over theoretical knowledge.

The place of contemplative, theoretician science was taken up by experimental, empirical scientific knowledge, which was oriented towards direct application of its discoveries. Scientific progress was all the more connected to technical progress, transforming the production procedure itself. Subsequently, production automatisation opened the way for overcoming the monotone and tiring mechanical labour, however it often led to unemployment (negative repercussion of discoveries).

In the evolution of science, there are three decisive moments that one can point out:

The first is connected to the knowledge that there is an opposition between spiritual and manual labour, an opposition between the achievements of science and civilization, and ignorance.

The second decisive moment in the history of science came with the first attempts to systematically study a specific object for humanity’s developmental needs, a fact which, nevertheless, created the risk of humanity’s own self-destruction by its own creations (ex. the atomic bomb).

At that decisive moment, science came to its senses and conscientiously entered into the service of humanity, structuring its development on the basis of a correct and mature scientific outlook and, following a specific plan, opened the way for the developed future.

At first, philosophy was directly identified to science, while individual sciences had not been separated from philosophy. Science’s official history starts with the presocratic philosophers in an era when science [“epistimi (επιστήμη)” in Greek from the verb epistamai (επίσταμαι), epi-istamai which literally means to stand over] and philosophy did not constitute separate objects, as they are today. Thirst for knowledge started from philosophical questions concerning the nature of man and the world.

If Aristotelian philosophy is connected to modern scientific thought, one can see from this angle that there is a relation between Aristotelian philosophy and the modern branches of science such as Quantum Physics, Microphysics, Cosmology, Astronomy, Mathematics, Chemistry, Biology, Psychology and Logic. This is so because the problematics of thinking refer to the character of scientific knowledge, the causality and teleology, the role of mathematics, the criticism of individualism and mechanistic determinism[1], as well as to matters of understanding basic ontological categories.

This is said in order to bridge the gap dividing philosophical reflection from philosophical thinking upon the fragmentation of knowledge in recent years, with the exponential growth of positive sciences.

The question to be evaluated in this new era is the passivity of societies, the creation of continuous consumer goods, specialization for the best performance of employees in modern societies. Knowledge was and still is power, and, as everyone knows, authority wants to control power. The major fragmentation of science and the specialization of sciences lessened the spiritual horizons of man, because his knowledge tends to be limited to his discipline.

Philosophy broadens the mind and, at the same time, goes beyond the visible aspect of things, transmitting to men metaphysical concerns as well.

Thus, philosophical thinking can offer conceptual bridges for achieving unity of knowledge, which is an imperative need nowadays for the full analysis of the cause and its use, in modern sciences.

Philosophy must advance based on the findings of the natural sciences and create a cohesive picture on the world and on life. The role the modern philosopher is called to play is one of genuine commitment at the service of the community, by developing praxeology; the obligation of modern Greeks is to be at the service of philosophy, in the country were it was created, by searching the cause of things and the absolute truth.

Philosophy today should deal with how man uses science and technique and it must play a leading part in assuring Peace and worldwide cooperation.

As a result, in our times, philosophy cannot just operate in the only frame of the thinker’s isolation any more. It is called upon to play its leading part on multiple levels and to support a multidimensional humanism without compromises.

Nowadays it is extremely difficult to make out the difference between pure and applied research.

Scientific discoveries are very closely followed by practical applications and are processed by the same people. The terrifying progress of Physics and Biology in the last, but also the current century, has completely changed the relation between science and society. Science offered huge improvement in the quality of life, but also created very serious dangers; such as environmental pollution, waste of vital resources, increase of contagious diseases, dangerous climatic changes, but mainly the threat of weapons of massive destruction. Technology aims only at men, showing indifference for the cost, the result being that one day we will have to confront the powers that we released ourselves (ex. Cloning). Our fear is double: fear of atomic war and fear of an ecologic collapse.

The existence of atomic weapons forced the cold war protagonists to broaden and perfect their arsenal for them to have the possibility of deterrence. The rational use of technique will neutralize its own undesirable side-effects as far as ecology is concerned. The support to a free economy, controlled competition among corporations, the obligation of scientists to disclose the results and the consequences of their researches, which means that they are accountable for their actions; we hope that with time all these actions will bring back the coveted balance in nature.

Today, in Geneva, a very ambitious programme is being run, the well-known CERN, which might bring answers as to the origin of the Universe. It might be a transcendence of science itself. Nevertheless, I do not believe that it will answer all questions, as successful as its evolution might prove to be.

Scientists bear great moral responsibility and play a dominant part in modern society, According to the mathematician Michael Atiyah, if you create something you must be interested in the consequences. Scientist should understand technical problems better than the average politician or citizen and their knowledge should be accompanied by the responsibility that comes with it. They should be able to give technical advice and help in resolving the unpredicted problems that come up. Scientists are the only ones that can warn us on future risks that might result from a current invention and they certainly constitute an international brotherhood that exceeds natural borders; they are, thus, in a position to have an overall view on the interests of mankind.

At the Schrödinger lecture and his presidential address to the Royal Society, Atiyah stressed the fact that scientists cannot claim that their work does not have anything to do with the affluence of individuals or government policy. They must take up responsibility for their actions for yet another reason: the consequences to sciences of having a bad public image. Nuclear weapons are a serious threat and scientists are rightfully blamed. Human cloning is faced as being immoral. Thoughtless repetition of X-rays, mammographies and other tests that emit radiation are very harmful to man. The creation of robots substituting human mind is a cold and arrogant technique.

The public has the possibility, via its elected governments, to control science either by stopping its financing, either by imposing restrictive terms. Scientists, with their conduct, must prove that they can combine creativity with compassion; that at the exact moment of their experimentation they continue being interested in their fellow human beings and that they are fully responsible for their actions when they fight with the unknown.

Lately, after Einstein’s theory of Relativity, science has made great steps in communications, micro-electronics, information technology, petrochemistry, our spatial experiences were broadened, the supernatural powers of atomic nuclei were tamed, medical sciences and biotechnology startlingly evolved, but the majority of people do not know what a quark[2] is or the mechanisms of evolution of the species, they ignore the second Law of thermodynamics, they know that the modern telescope shows that the Universe is much bigger than what we thought, but they ignore the mystery of its dark matter and energy that constantly pushes it to expand, and so many other issues.

This is why it is very important that the general public learn the basic principles of modern scientific thinking, in an accessible manner, since, on a daily basis, we face dilemmas related to nuclear energy, genetic interventions, environmental change etc. The significance of Albert Einstein’s speech is still untouched. “It is very important to give the world the chance to acquire experiences from the efforts of scientific research … When this knowledge is limited to a small group, our people’s philosophical spirit is led to necrosis and this results in spiritual poverty.”

In 1994, Joseph Rotblat in Physics World, had suggested that very precise measures should be taken concerning all that is mentioned above. The first was a new moral code for the conduct of scientists, comparable to the Hippocratic Oath for doctors.

Nowadays, one can claim that scientists almost have a part similar to mankind. So, it is high time that all those who acquire a scientific title start giving some kind of oath or pledge. This would be of significant symbolic value, but could also develop the awareness and questioning on broader issues in young scientists.

Such an oath had been proposed by the Student section of the American group called Pugwash and would be adequate for the awards ceremony of all young scientists, in combination with the insertion in university programmes of modules relative to the moral aspects of science.

It is quite clear that such a pledge would not be consistent with carriers related to chemicals, biological or nuclear weapons.

National academies or every country’s respective foundations should create ethic committees, as there are in medicine for many countries, in order to be assured that science will not put the life and health of the weaker in danger. And this practice must expand within research work in general, starting by genetic engineering. Nevertheless, there are organizations that can develop such activities when the academies cannot, due to statutory limitations or because they are governmental organizations.

The Pugwash movement is such an independent organization of scientists, which approaches the image of the world with a true scientific conscience and describes its role as follows:

“The Pugwash movement is the expression of the awareness of the social and moral duty of natural scientists to help avoid and surpass the real and potential harmful effects of scientific and technological inventions and to promote the use of science and technology for objectives of peace.”

The Pugwash movement assembles, from around the globe, scientists, intellectuals and people experienced in governmental, diplomatic and military issues and mainly focuses on the basic threat that is the development of nuclear weapons and the non conversion of the cold war into a warm one. If this was to happen, we would be led to the destruction of our civilization and, possibly, of mankind. When, under diverse conditions, the cold war came to an end, the Pugwash movement turned its interest to the main target: full elimination of nuclear weapons, as far as possible of course, as some countries still go on developing nuclear weapons and world safety cannot possibly be maintained on the long run. The fact of their invention and that they still exist cannot be erased from our memories.

The world must continue to exist, supported by scientists who seek ways, introduce their experiences, each in their sector, scientists that will, day by day, deliver an improved image of science, reflecting the reason for its creation.

---

[1] Determinism = the predetermined outcome of a process

[2] Quark = a subparticle of protons and neutrons in atomic nuclei.