- Rotten Root
We all have been taught from our school days that Science is the supreme knowledge to know about the world and the Universe. Once anything is proved through science, it is undeniable. Only through science that we could know about the truth of anything in this world. Once it is proved, it is universal and accepted all over the world. Saying like this the western society has been very successful in making people think only in one way which is their own and turn people against anyone who think the other. What if I tell you that science is full of lies and science cannot be used to know the truth of anything in this world. If you try to know about something with scientific truth, you will never know.
Science means to know. To know about the mysteries of this mysterious and strange universe. To know through hard evidence and facts that has to be found by human beings. In other words, to know something that is already in existence, with proofs collected though experiments and verification. Basically science is only for us to know, not for the existence of the universe. If you follow this logic, this world and the universe has nothing to do with science. science is only for us humans to know about it. A rock does not care that you should know that it is billions of years old, neither the tree nor the galaxies. They just exists on their own. The reason and the evidence that scientists discover, was also in existence from the very beginning along with the thing they are discovering. So if we have not found anything or do not know the reason for something, does not mean that the thing does not exists or fake. It just means that we have not found the necessary evidence to prove it.
2. The Fake Proofs
The common saying in Science is “Science is True for Today and False for Tomorrow”. What does that mean? Pluto was a Planet and now it is not? and again it is a Planet? So when you said Pluto is a Planet and if I had denied at that point of time, I am lying? it is a Hoax? but with new evidence when you say the same, you are saying the truth?. That means when you said Pluto was a planet, you were lying. Lying to people of this world who are not scientists and who doesn’t care for your proofs. Consider an example where your Boss has given a task for you to count the no. of flowers in a Plant. You have counted and submitted the report as twelve. Your boss appreciates you. Then after some time you go and say that you have discovered a new branch and the no. of flowers has increased to Twenty. what your boss does? if it is in a Corporate environment you will be apprehended for giving the wrong report by missing that branch. The branch was always there and you had missed it. It was trusted on you to get the correct count of flowers. It was your job to discover the other branch and all the remaining hidden branch. You didn’t. You might say that the branch was hidden and it was discovered later because new proofs came to show it’s existence. That means, the process that you are following to count the flowers, it might not be possible to get the exact count of the flowers. There will always be hidden branches which will contradict your previous report. In that case how can you claim that you are correct. How can you deny others that contradict you and how can you say that yours is the only way to count. If you say these then you just want your report to be right and do not care about the actual result. Relating this to science, for someone who wants to know the exact reality of this universe, the way science expects you to find, will never be complete. In this case, the other ways and methods to know should be open and respected, but the so called scientific people have the audacity to say that there is no other way.
It has happened many times in Science. Even Newton’s Gravity theory was proved wrong by Einstein. That means Isaac Newton, the father of Physics was not aware completely about Gravity. So can we call him Ignorant Scientist? You can’t say there were no tools to discover at that time. Even if you say that, it doesn’t stop from Newton being wrong. He was Ignorant of that. When the situation of Greatest of the Scientists are like this, when their Proofs and Results are thrown overboard from new proofs and Results, when there is a continuous regression of events happening and Science is changing every single day, how can you know reality in one lifetime. Through science the only real knowledge of existence can be known only at the dusk of science where every proof is known and every result possible is achieved. Me and you and many generations yet to come will also not be present at that point of time. I am not saying that Newton or Einstein are wrong and disrespecting them. I am trying to say that the way they are trying to know reality, it cannot be know in it’s entirety.
3. The Example Problem of Existentialists
Consider me as an Existentialist. That means one who is open to everything in existence. One who doesn’t depend only on proof but also on his own experience and Intelligence. When such a person is trying to explain something without proofs to a so called scientific person ( not a scientist ), gives an example to support his theories. Instead of understanding what the example is trying to say, the other man builds his whole argument around the example itself. Asks further questions about the example, for ex: I have used Newton and Einstein as Examples, Here the other man starts asking me questions about Newton or Einstein, their theories, their contribution, going into the details of their work. I will not be able to answer those or construct my argument around those because of lack of knowledge about them. So the other person disproves my theory. Here the question is not about the example. It is about what I am trying to say with that example. You can use the same example to make your point, but that should be about the concept not about the example. Even if I am not able to answer further questions related to the examples, that does not disproves the point I was trying to make. Most of the so called scientific persons are lost in the example itself and we end up being the one who cannot support our argument according to them.
“When a finger is pointed at the moon, look at the moon, not the finger and please don’t bite the finger”
Through this I have tried to shed lights on some points where common people deluding themselves as people of science, bottle themselves to the immense possibilities of the universe, which is always willing to impart it’s mysteries to anyone who tries to unravel. A scientist or a philosopher or a poet or a common man, It does not matter, anyone who wish to open up for the Immensity of this world, it produces an innumerous ways of knowing which we could not even comprehend. what it requires is a an openness and receptiveness to the present that always surrounds us.