elainegrey

I've spent much of my morning time reflecting on epistemology, prompted by questions on a Quaker lists for scientists to respond to some questions about the similarities and differences in Quaker and scientific ways of knowing.

I am thankful for C--'s reflection on the trouble that unitary truth and either/or categorization can cause. I found that tension personally in my graduate student career, not over my physics research subject matter initially, but in the approach to one's full life. As i reflected, i came to understand the models we were constructing to describe nuclear and high-energy particles as a scaffolding that helped us reach the reality of the physical world, but i could not accept them as the truth of the physical world. It was clear to me that one could erect the scaffolding in many ways: some ways were going to be more effective at supporting scaffolding to reach more of the reality at scales different than the ones we directly experience -- but scaffolding has a bias no matter how you build it.

I found my colleagues to be oblivious of the fundamental assumptions that provide the support for most of the scientific process of building that scaffolding, assumptions that are experimentally and observationally supported because of the success the scaffolding built on them has had in reaching certain dimensions of reality. However, it's a bit like saying, "Two right turns and a left is the right way to get to work." (I exaggerate.) There are certain destinations that may be left out of such a route.

The question of "dark matter" and whether the universe has enough mass to overcome the observed expansion so that the ultimate fate would be for the universe to contract again was a very hot topic at the University of Pennsylvania when i was there. It wasn't where i and my peers were doing research, but we discussed what we learned at seminars. I was fascinated by the non-scientific conviction of a colleague of mine: there must be dark matter because the universe must collapse.

"Why must it collapse?" I would ask.

"Because what is the point of going on if it doesn't," he responded.

In seminars the possibility of a heat death was judged with less existential angst, but still with a bias against. It was the "unaesthetic" out come, and clearly the beautiful solution must be right. We just haven't figured out how to get to the beautiful solution.

I left writing this to go skim the cosmological entries in wikipedia. I am thankful for the passions that drive this research. While it seems so far away from the questions regarding just distribution of resources, my guilt as i look at the plastic bucket last night's wonton soup came in, and the question of whether a bagpipe is in good keeping with a meeting for worship in memory of a Friend, i appreciate the the discoveries and the wonder as a good for both heart and mind.

Perhaps it is like the joke about how many Quakers it takes to change a lightbulb? The practice of discernment -- practice, practice, practice -- is needed so that we -- as individuals, as a species -- can learn to better understand and choose our next steps. Whether you frame our collective destination is bringing about the experience of the second coming, the Light in all hearts, or a Gaia without cancers, or simply harmony, having some of the tribe focussed on discovery and discernment for the sake of discovery and discernment helps develop the skills and gifts needed to reach those destinations.