Deconstruction of science

[Starlight321]

Hey there, I've deconstructed religion, mathematics and language mostly via youtube channels like "religionforbreakfast", "let's talk religion" and some articles on the internet and wikipedia. 

I'm now looking for new sources to deconstruct science and a little bit more  mathematics. 

Has anyone some good sources to do that? I've already read most of "the structure of scientific revolution".  Maybe there are some youtube channels which explain how science and mathematics was done over the course of the centuries.

Thx in advance!

@DocWatts

@Leo Gura

[nuwu]

Retrocausality of God's intelligence yields holographic, non-terminating qualia fractals which are set intersection of beliefs and understandings, chaos and structure, survival and love, in infinite potentialities of 'sleepy' perspectival experiences, or at least it seems. Present-day epistemology appears to exhibit the following traits:

1. Constructivism: Symbolism, formalism, or 'computational conceptualization', carrying over maps which are themselves subsets of the territory being described, therefor recursively abstracting over themselves. Self-reference imbues paradoxes which are necessarily tautological and incomplete, usually sustained by disorganized symbolical entanglements covering emptiness of essence. (transformers appear to alleviate latter issues, trained on vast amount of data to dissolve statistical connection, but they raise others, such as excessive abstraction and non-human reinforcement of biases.)
2. Reputation Matrices: Report weights are important, if not detrimental, in associative and controlled studies (e.g. in nutrition sciences), or as noise filters in constructive branches. Resource allocations are also important factors in the distribution of cognitive capacities, which leads to a biased exploration of ruliad space.
3. Self-Serving: Unfortunately, contemporary scientific methods do not deconstruct reality in ways that undermine their own survival, or the one of entities who foster them, as inherent limitation of their ontological reasoning capabilities. On the premise everything is imaginary, abstraction necessarily intertwines with survival to become attachments, themselves encompassing the structure of reality. In other words, mathematics are beautiful, because beauty is a desirable aspect of retrocausal creation.
4. Truth-Seeking: The core strength of science lies in its alleged, fundamental exploration of objective understandings, generating a singularity of unifying views about reality. While the intensity and intellectual honestly of such traits may or may not be adequate relative to metaphysics, historically, it is the first significant metacognitive belief system driven by the awareness of rigor. 

Potential interesting sources:

• Culmination of Stephen Wolfram works: https://writings.stephenwolfram.com/2021/11/the-concept-of-the-ruliad/ https://www.wolframphysics.org https://writings.stephenwolfram.com/2020/04/finally-we-may-have-a-path-to-the-fundamental-theory-of-physics-and-its-beautiful/ https://www.wolfram.com/language/elementary-introduction/3rd-ed/ — presumably biased towards substance reductionism, nonetheless intriguing 
• Actualized series on science: https://youtu.be/QwyPdXtl0HU https://youtu.be/LR2rB8tuD2I https://youtu.be/FeOIuybpfgc — may or may not be up to date with latest views or styles
• Introduction to incompleteness in metaphysics: https://youtu.be/qWuaPEpKgfk
• Alien interviews: https://www.actualized.org/forum/topic/94860-real-footage-of-an-alien/ e.g. "Both are one. Technology is a natural expression of humanity. Technology is a process the vessel uses to perfect itself."
• Interaction Nets efforts: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0890540197926432 https://github.com/HigherOrderCO/HVM https://github.com/VictorTaelin/Formality — Assuming hypergraph rewriting frameworks may be generally useful as metamathematical constructs
• This forum: https://www.actualized.org/forum/topic/79663-three-principles-for-the-problem-of-describing-god/?page=2#comment-1116837 https://www.actualized.org/forum/topic/91604-elon-musk-supports-ubi/?page=2#comment-1297988 — Presumably nested or deeper meanings

Speculatively, in the future, science may evolve in the following ways:

• Survival Awareness: Algorithmic peer review, or other financial models based on smart-contracts, could allow science to be more fluid, inclusive, and self-leveraging, with an increasing recognition of qualitative approaches. Insights of neuroscience and collective intelligence are themselves useful in improving the shape and dynamics of knowledge frameworks. It's unclear how metaphysics and direct ego-awareness will reach adoption, or if it could happen, but game theory and evolutionary concepts have been shown increasingly successful and widespread.
• Representational Invariance: Adoption of separations between raw observational inputs (video, audio, or multi-sensorial recordings), distinct from the interpretations themselves (processing data into models or statistical analysis).
• Interdisciplinary Convergence: Formalism may merge with programming languages, where category theory, set theory, homotopy type theory, lambda calculus, etc, are abstracted as generic relationship systems rather than potentially redundant symbolic expressions. Effectiveness of harmony and holism may be inevitable. Science could potentially absorb or merge with other branches exploring consciousness, with increasing uses of psychedelics or non-material oriented states.

[UnlovingGod]

14 hours ago, Starlight321 said:

Hey there, I've deconstructed religion, mathematics and language mostly via youtube channels like "religionforbreakfast", "let's talk religion" and some articles on the internet and wikipedia. 

I'm now looking for new sources to deconstruct science and a little bit more  mathematics. 

Has anyone some good sources to do that? I've already read most of "the structure of scientific revolution".  Maybe there are some youtube channels which explain how science and mathematics was done over the course of the centuries.

Thx in advance!

@DocWatts

@Leo Gura

You´ve propably seen "the myth of science" series by Leo Gura? Charles Tart is also good at pointing the limitations of science being a scientist himself.

[DocWatts]

If you haven't read it already and are up for a lengthy and very in depth read, Ken Wilber's works contextualize science in a very insightful and penetrating way. In particular, I'd recommend 'Eye To Eye : The Quest For A New Paradigm' and 'Sex, Ecology, Spirituality'.

Part of why I found those works useful is that he doesn't just deconstruct science, but he also takes the necessary next step of reconstructing science and integrating it into a holistic meta-epistomology which also includes philosophy and spirituality.

Additionally, I'd also highly recommend 'The Embodied Mind : Cognitive Science and Human Experience ' by Varella, Thompson, and Roach for the way it reconstructs (specifically cognitive science) beyond a materialist framework (while of course deconstructing scientism). If you're familiar with the work of John Verveake, this book offers an in depth exploration of many of the same topics and paradigms that he discusses.

'Science Ideated' by Bernardo Kastrup is also a good read, though it's also tied to an objective idealism framework (which you may or may not find valid - for myself I find his insights useful, even if I find myself questioning 'grand metaphysical frameworks')

 

Edited September 6, 2023 by DocWatts