The demystification of Science.
The demystification of science and rationality, as a strategy to society.
A full democratization of education will improve the quality of life and will help in designing a secure and stable, modern society.
Whatever invalidates the unilateral way of thinking in the people’s minds will contribute to the liberation of humanity.
Each ideology, which is a challenge what someone inherited as a belief, reinforces their enlightenment. Science is rigid, has ceased to be a tool for change and liberation.
It has a deformative power and George Orwoyel would say “ science is the police of the thought” . Science solves problems of society, but it also creates new problems
(From Aid to AIDS).
The separation between state and science promotes the society of knowledge. Education without the stifling dominance of science, leads to free development of students. The knowledge embedded in skills as we design and solve problems. There is not always written in bibliography, but we can learn it with exercise, and knowledge passes by the way of craftsmen and apprentices of a guild. This creates a relationship between the inwardness of tradition and innovation. This knowledge is applied with the process through which we adopt and transmit the technologies which are applications of theory in specific contexts of solving problems.
The purpose of education is to help young people lead their own lives, in society and develop the natural world that surrounds them.
Young people’s minds mast be reinforced and not forced them into any easy acceptance of views. Haider dispiritingly declared that humanity as a whole has not yet come out of the prehistory of thought. We still live in the middle ages. We rarely find people who can think for one original purpose.
The original thinking and its open assessment are obstructed, even perhaps is destroyed by the negative attitude and the stubbornly slow hearing and the popularization by the policy of creed and religion against thought.
The truth taught by the Baal Eminence is permanently exiled, when it is visible it causes hatred and ridicule, it seems something like there is racism to anyone who is thinking aloud. Society tries to rein in children, to organize them, to reduce their imagination, to land them on a life without curiosity. At the same time few people allowed to develop their imagination.
The memory can be strengthened by practice. The analytical methods, the strict standard sequence may pass and be leached in mathematical education, the theoretical rationale of the chess player.
To prevent children from learning through memorization means that we lead the muscles of mind to atrophy, perhaps permanently. So, as far as the cerebral skills, the developing receptivity and interpretation, are concerned many things that can be enhance and enriched with teaching and practice.
There is no teaching way to develop creativity. The innovative transformational thinking in the arts, in the science and philosophy is born through mysterious bumps in quantum leaps when conscious and subconscious meet.
The aids can be taught - music, structure, mathematical notation-but the transformative use of these instruments to new mapping of the human potential can not be foreseen or institutionalized.
Only then it will be able to counter and replace anything it is not sufficient, without spend our lives working in a unique idea.
The reinforcement of the imagination and the real spirit of opposition can be obtained by learning several languages and by dealing with art. This way young people can understand the different paths they have followed from the philosophy of various cultures. The fertile thought can be and must be in the education and the general climate of recognition.
As Elytis wrote in the {Open cards} the lack of imagination changes the human being to a disabled man of reality.
In the past, every adult was a teacher. People lived and learned through practice. Now only the educational system is recognized with the right to teach, in a way one could claim that someone is trying to destroy the young people.
An alternative education resembles today as the only escape route for the youngster, as Kafka refers in the text of the ‘Statement to the Academy’.
Proposals for new education must come from friends and not by remotely wiseacre thinkers. "These schools serve as institutional factories.
Everyone is invited to participate in the education of young people and to contribute to the enrichment of culture. The pluralistic methodology with the introduction of views in our teaching, will contribute to the discovery even the change of the world characteristics. I hence mention the alternative cosmologies from the Bible and the Iliad. We should not forget that the Pythagorean proposal that earth is moving, was characterized ridiculous by Ptolemy in the book of the Structure (as shown on p. 82 against the method).
Also the selection of courses from
students and their parents is essential
for the democratic development of society. The compulsory
courses, the blind obedience to the decision of the
scientists, and the uncritical acceptance of them remind
views of the Cardinals in the past times.
The main axis in a democratic education can be the
acquaintance with the major propagandists of all
sectors. So the student can enhance his
capability of resistance against propaganda,
including the propaganda called
logical argument. The study of the major ideologies
as historical events including the
science will help young people to have free decision.
Only this way the special and sometimes unique skills of every child will be exploited.
Gradually old traditions are rediscovered. Until now whenever traditions were contradicted the established system of values, were characterized terrifying or nonexistent.
Science is not more significant than other life forms. In a free society members have the ability to decide and live according to their beliefs. They can voluntarily choose to become scientists in universities and factories, as in the antiquity, the ancient Greeks had slaves who contributed to the progress of their culture. We will consult, them but we will not let them impose their ideology on our children. We can not let them deal with human relationships in schools, educational programs or to reform prisons, only with the scientific way.
The results of an education which demystifies the science and accepts human cultures would be:
-The development of internal balance and ecological consciousness.
- The development of new practice of education and teaching methods, which will protect the future of European society from all ideologies, including science.
-The demystification of science and rationality as a strategy in society.
-The social organization of education can provide answers to contemporary issues that transcend traditional divisions of humanities.
- The elimination of the sweeping brutality of our scientific era.
---Someone could support that: science holds a special position among the other systems of knowledge. We can mention the landing on the moon, the treatment of diseases by modern medicine.
But are these results dew only to the scientific methods? Did not data, coming from non scientific areas, contribute to the development of science?
Practical botany, astronomy of mystics (Newton-astrology), treatment of the sick in primitive societies contributed the advancement of science.
Does logical thought and good scientific method or a happy coincidence lead only to success? Is it only the neutral handling of data that enhances development of society?
I would like to present you an example.
Philolaus was not a rigorous scientist, but an insane Pythagorean theorist with incredibly ridiculous theories, as assessed by the professional astronomer Ptolemaios.sel.103 versus
The Philolaus (6th-5th century BC) was the first who dethroned the Earth from the center of the universe and put into place a fiery ball a focal point around which the Earth turns once every 24 hours. He considered that the Sun, Earth and moon orbiting this fiery ball. The invention is the Pythagorean Philolaus - that the Earth and Moon move - was a real revolution for its time. Today we accept that the outbreak of Philolaus and the Pythagoreans were the Sun.
It was impossible to spread the idea of Filolaou , nor of the Aristarchus Samios that supported the heliocentric system, because of the tremendous prestige of Aristotle's view about Earth.
Copernicus was based on his theories trying to meet the astronomical needs.
Even Galileo admired and wondered how Aristarchus and Copernicus (Dialogue, 328) with their mystical (circular motion) logic exceeded the Aristotelian sense experience. (Arguments) p. 365 Opponents
Obviously modern astronomy and dynamic would not proceed without the unscientific use of ancient ideas.
Nowadays, the traditional medicine of Communist China led to new medical methods.
Acupuncture, the diagnosis with the pulse helped medicine and we understand that all ideas and all methods will help us understand nature and complement our eco-consciousness.
The convenient story that outside science there is not knowledge, vanishes if we realize that primitive tribes have more detailed classifications of animals and plants of modern zoology and botany, they known effective therapies, surprising doctors and the pharmaceutical companies if they can earn more money.
Formal teaching is full of redundant material and is placed in old age. This makes modern science difficult. During the war the training of doctors lasted half as usual. In wartime science can be simplified and in peacetime it can be complexed.
Also how many times did the patient have to choose between conflicting medical diagnoses, without seeing the infallible assessment of unique science?
The road leading to the goal is clear. A science that insists on holding the only correct method and the only acceptable outcome is ideology and must be separated from the state and particularly from the educational process. It can be taught but only to those who have decided to acquire this particular bias.
We should approach those who take advantage of our ideas, as beggars, we are not the greatest gift of God to the man. We must live the life we want to change. Knowledge must derive from participation, since every change requires the consent of everyone to whom it is addressed.
ANIMATION
The following animation shows a simplified geocentric model with three objects: the Earth (blue) in the centre with the Sun (yellow) and Mars (red) in circular orbits around it. Mars travels on an epicycle which is centred on its deferent. (Note how this model successfully predicts that Mars should be brighter during retrograde motion than at other times due to its smaller distance to the Earth at that time.) Mars orbits on its epicycle at a rate such that a line drawn from the deferent to Mars is always parallel to the Earth-Sun line.
The phenomenon of “retrograde motion” occurs while Mars is at opposition.
REFERENCES
Paul Feyerabend, Against Method, Publications Modern Issues, 2006 issue of W,
Paul Feyerabend, Farewell to reason. Translation Bourlakis Paris. Pendulum Publishing.
George Steiner, Ten Reasons to melancholy thought, Scripta Publishing
Merrilee H. Salmon, Introduction to Philosophy of Science,
