How Can We Transcend Our Minds - Essay Example

STUDENTS FULL NAME PROFESSOR’S NAME AFFILIATE INSTITUTION DATE DUE OF ASSIGNEMENT HOW CAN WE TRANSCEND OUR MINDS Introduction There is a long tradition of opposing arguments about the theories of laws of nature. Therefore, there is a need to research and formulate theories that would accurately predict the observed phenomenon without worrying about critics or opponents who put blanket objections to the theories of science. We have to understand that, from the modern view point there is little known about the role of actual sensory experience in the acquisition of knowledge of how natural processes occur. The only way to prove the truthfulness of these theories is by repeating them several times under different situation to ascertain their accuracy. The main question for scientist to ask is whether they are capable of dealing new theories and laws of natural with the same old mind set. They need to transcend that kind of mindset in order to appreciate new scientific discoveries and innovations. Researchers should address questions such as, how could they make sure that nonprofessional understands the theories and laws of natural processes as being true constitute true knowledge about nature and the impact of just formulated theory have on our daily life. There is a breather in that science solely based on facts alone such as if we want to know why hot air balloons raise upwards. Every one of us believes in what we heard or passed down to us by our parents. Through the understanding of what happens when air is heated it expands and becomes lighter we would not have a problem explaining as to what course the hot air balloon to rise up. Science as evolved to what it is today because is associated with experiments, the gathering of data about what actually happens in various circumstances and could be replicated by anyone with basic knowledge on science. Hence there is a school of thought in epistemology called empiricism, which belief that scientific theories could only be obtained through experiments and proper analysis of data but not using pure thought or reason. In other words, the way to arrive at justified beliefs about the world is to obtain evidence by making observations or gathering data. (Ladyman 21) Human beings are bombarded with myths, traditional and religious beliefs. As such, it is difficult to for some to understand wholeheartedly those facts of science. We tend to be overcritical and underestimate the importance of science. It is difficult for a staunch religious person to understand evolution as is explained by anthropologist because they do belief that everything was created by a god. To transcend the self-limitations of our minds we need to acknowledge and recognize that we are not responsible for the beliefs, thoughts and ideas that originate and enter our mind especially those that go contrarily to our traditional or religious beliefs. We have to understand that self-mastery of our minds requires that we should focus on acting with courage to accept science the way it is. How can we transcend our minds? Transcendence of the mind requires that we get out of our comfort zones try new ideas, learn and accept other ways of thinking. Transcendence is not just about understanding facts as they are. It is also about overcoming our preconceived negative thoughts, myths and beliefs. Scientific research leads to genuine knowledge of both observable and unobservable aspects of the science and nature. One of the facts put forward in favor of science is the scientific realism, which simply asserts that science seeks the truth about the nature. For the scientific realist, the scientific pursuit of truth results into genuine knowledge of about the natural world. According to Musgrave the epistemic realism entails scientific research and analysis of data that yields knowledge of truth about the true reality of nature as investigated by scientists. (Musgrave 2001) Self-transcendence is not just about accepting scientific facts as they are, but is about being ready to let go of all self-imposed limitations of our minds by closely looking at the major contributions of scientific knowledge and examining the impact it as had. How it had revolutionized our lives, in the medical field we are now able to live long and survive from diseases that would have killed us, how easy our interconnectivity as improved since the innovation of telephones, internet, mobiles and airplanes. Therefore, to transcend our minds we need to have to accept that for us to make progress and be able to solve most of our problems. We have to achieve these by setting realistic scientific goals or objectives in order to getting rid of limitations in solving our problems and improve our physical health to attain overall mental transcendence. To transcend our minds we need to have sound theories to base our scientific inquiries on such as we endeavor to make scientific progress we also do progress on social sciences in order to acquire enough knowledge that will enable us to understand the laws of natural and how they influence out daily lives, how to maximize their use to our advantage without offsetting nature and our we interacted with each other. As we make an effort to improve our lives, on the process there will be new challenges that have to be met therefore, we to continue formulating new theories or coming up with new innovations that requires that the scientists involved come out and educate communities on the importance and advantages of using their innovations. All these require patience, consistence and perseverance plus the desire to succeed. As for epistemic realism scientific knowledge is not restricted to the observational or experimental level, but it extends to unobservable aspects of nature as well. To transcend our beliefs we have to understand that epistemic realism is what characterizes scientific realism as an epistemological doctrine distinct from contemporary versions of empiricist philosophy of science. It is possible to rationally justified either belief or knowledge about unobservable states of affairs. This rationale is what distinguishes scientific realism from neo-Kantian constructivist views, which denied epistemic objectivity access to the mind-independent scientist that is necessary to transcend our minds beyond our physical phenomenal experience. Scientific knowledge extends beyond observational level this could be further reflected in the third core claim of scientific realism that requires scientist to transcend their minds in order to understand the importance of correct interpretation of theoretical entities, which is to be interpreted correctly in order to genuinely commit to the existence of real unobservable entities. Scientists do explain observed phenomena based on underlying processes and the explanations they provided referred to unobservable entities whose behavior is responsible for the observed phenomena. This transformation of realist treatment of theoretical observational lead to both an ontological and a semantic dimension, where the ontological level, is realistic about theoretical entities since it implies that there really were unobservable entities, which underlined the observable phenomena while at the semantic level, it generally implicate respect to the reference of theoretical terms. The theoretical entity is important only as an aid to prediction, but by contrasting with instrumentalism. The scientific realist transcended their mind and understood that the theoretical discourse referred to events and regularities that took place at the unobservable level. Indicating that somewhere along the line of the traditional or religious belief justified a true belief account of scientific knowledge is minimal condition for realist transcendence of concepts and scientific knowledge, given the need to produce a clear distinction between realism, assorted relativist and social constructivist conceptions of knowledge with which it contrasts. Commitment to a mind-independent, objective reality is what most fundamentally characterizes scientific realism as a form of realism and transcendence of the mind. (Sankey 2008) To transcend our mind, an individual need not be limited by his own thoughts and beliefs because these thoughts and beliefs are often deeply embedded in our mind. Therefore, the first thing we need to be aware of is how easily we could be distracted by our own self-imposed limitations. Quite often, we underrate how important our thoughts processes become if we permit them to limit our perspective and capacities to think and analysis new ideas without being bias. We do not have to listen to our negative thoughts and believes, we need to understand that progress does not come through listening to critics, suspicions and disbelief of thoughts. To transcend our mind, it is important to differentiate between constructive criticism and advice to learn to ignore negativity to free our mind to learn and acquire scientific knowledge. Be focused and wholly heartily committed to scientific knowledge, new ideas, through harnessing of the power of concentration we would gain unimaginable focus to concentrate on a particular scientific concept until we get the results we need that way our scientific improvement will come spontaneously. The laws of nature and the truth consists of correspondence between a theory about nature and the way nature is (Laudan 1984) on such a view of truth, for a statement to be true the concepts must be the way the concepts says it is and the statement must correspond to the known scientific facts. Thus, a theoretical concept about an unobservable entity is true if the theoretical entity really is how it is claimed to be. (Putnam 1981) Transcendence of the mind requires that one stops perceiving scientific knowledge from the limitations of our thoughts, myths and beliefs these may probably seem impossible to overcome some scientific barriers we have to remember that it is impossible, but that does not mean they could not be overcome. Therefore, the question is how we could advance our scientific knowledge as opposed to mere belief or opinion through scientific method. Whatever any of us may believe, rightly or wrongly about whether industrialization as caused climate change or deforestation as lead to desertification that in turn as lead to climatic change a government will not act unless there is scientific evidence supporting such a claim they may still not act even when there is overwhelming evidence. How to acquire scientific knowledge of the workings of nature, the scientific method begins with the observations that will lead to formulation of a theory or with further studies the underlying mechanisms are understood. This process is to reach the truth by collecting data and analyzing of information about particular states of affairs and building from them systematically to reach a general conclusion. This process is what (Ladyman 23) According to Bacon, he suggested that the method of scientific realism rested on two pillars that are induction and observation. Where observation was supposed to be undertaken without preconception or prejudice, and the results were recorded and analyzed through sensory experience about what we could see, observe and quantify whether of the special circumstances of our experiments or of the natural processes as we find it. The observation so made are then formulated into a theory, once we have made a whole host of observations they are to be used as the basis for formulation of scientific laws and theories. Many scientific theories are of the form of what are called theory of generalizations, which are statements that generalize about the properties of a natural processes of a certain kind in there natural environment. (Ladyman 27) One of the reasons why we formulate theories of scientific method is so that we could ascertain whether scientific knowledge is justified and, if so, what is its limits and whether there is any useful material of service that could be made out of it to help humanity. (Ladyman 62) One of the arguments for the need of transcending our scientific knowledge is advanced by Popper’s solution to the problem of induction where he simply argues that scientific knowledge was not justified, simply because science does not depend on induction at all. Popper pointed out that there was a logical asymmetry between falsification and confirmation of theories, but the problem of induction arises because no matter how many positive experiments of theories were postulated it was still possible that next experiment would falsify it. Therefore, Popper argued that science was fundamentally about falsifying rather than confirming theories, and so he thought that science could proceed without induction because the inference from a falsifying observation to the falsity of a theory was purely deductive. (Popper 1969) The scientific method was supposed to be rational and to give us objective knowledge of the natural processes. Therefore, to say that scientific knowledge was objective it means that it was not the product of guesswork, but it was a collection of facts that should be believed by everyone, regardless of his or her other beliefs and values. Therefore, if it is an objective fact that overeating causes obesity, or that a metal expand when heated, then it ought to be believed equally by non-scientist, if these science is to be rational. The scientific method has evolved from the Bacon’s inductivism that is an account of how to postulate scientific theories to that of Popper’s falsificationism, which is concerned with the testing of scientific theories to confirm their truthfulness once they have been proposed. (Ladyman 93) Kuhn argued that many the communities of historians’ accounts of the history of their specific fields of specialization considerably distorted and simplified the true nature of theory formulation and knowledge. This was because their understanding of evolution of a discipline intended to motivate, inspire and justify theories, more than they intended to be faithful to the truth facts of history. Therefore, Kuhn compared the relationship between histories of science as written in books with what is told to outsiders of a culture especially tourist on what a country’s culture is like. Governments focus more on the kind of historical information in order to promote a particular sector of the economy of country or some distort it to appease the tourists such as museums and game reserves, local culture, and downplay or omit entirely the other aspects that it prefers to be ignored, such as the historical injustices that are committed by the government on its citizens. (Kuhn 1977) To transcend our minds we have to understand that sound scientific knowledge that, which we could count on for practical use, based on the ability of the observation being repeated severely without altering the basic concept and agreement. Only what is observed, especially in experimental settings, certified by repeated replication and agreement independently of our perspectives, institutional norms, expedient alliances and their interests can properly serve as evidence for scientific facts and for postulating scientific theories. Because, the grounds on which scientific hypotheses are accepted or rejected are provided by empirical evidence, which may include observational findings as well as previously established laws and theories of natural processes. The way in which facts are persuasive in scientific endeavors is incompatible with autonomy, but impartiality remains an important and essential virtue of all scientific inquiries to gaining scientific understanding and knowledge. (Lacey 21) There are challenges that face us everyday in order to transcend our tendencies of the fear of unknown. We have to observe the consequences of our altered natural processes, in order to overcome them and come up with proper scientific process that will eliminate them. Therefore, it is necessary that the scientific community be able to relax their mind and find relief from stress as a vital point to happiness and a healthy body especially with the constant pressures of work and the increasing developments in technology every day. Scientists should be more courageous to try new methods or processes of alleviating human suffering, creating machines that would make our lives easy and understand that scientific-mastery occurs in those moments when we subordinate our little will personal tendencies and preferences. In the earlier scientific enquiries when there was no supervision or ethical questions, scientific community tended to carry out their research on animals and human being without any regard to their safety and concerns. As the appreciation of scientific discoveries and innovations progressed there is a need for proper regulation and observation of ethical considerations in carrying out scientific enquiries, which required that the scientific community overcome their objections to regulations by government agencies. For the scientific knowledge to be of importance to humanity, the scientist have to submit to stringent ethics standards that will enable them to carry out there scientific enquiries without jeopardizing the life’s. It is through self-assessment of behavior and actions towards government regulations on all scientific enquiries that has led to enormous development of novel products that have boosted the health of man, and increased the efficiency of communication, travel and sharing important information across the world. It is important too on the individual letting go of our past fears and even irrational fears of the present can allow us to be more open to changes and to the world around us as it is, which is helpful in ridding us off negative feelings and emotions that would otherwise hinder our progress intellectually. (Tsvetan 2012) Works cited Kuhn, T.S. The Essential Tension, Chicago: University of Chicago Press 1977. Print Lacey H., Is Science Value Free? Values and Scientific Understanding, Routledge 1999. Print Ladyman J. Understanding Philosophy of Science, Routledge 2002. Print Laudan, L. Beyond Positivism and Relativism, Westview 1996. Print. Musgrave, Alan (2001), ‘Metaphysical Realism versus Word-Magic’, Amsterdam and Atlanta, 2001 29-54. Print Popper K. Conjectures and Refutations. London, Routledge. 1969 Print. Putnam, Hilary Reason, Truth and History, Cambridge University 1981 Print. Sankey H, Rationality of Science and Scientific Realism, Ashgate Publishing Ltd 2008. Print Tsvetan Petrov Dominic, gifted psychic counselor, Clairvoyant, and intuitive specializing in relationship issues. 2012. Web. Read More