Realist Versus instrumentalist Thinking
For the past 400 years, mainstream Western scientific inquiry has operated firmly within the boundaries of Realism. Scientific Realism is built on a foundation of minimalism and simplicity—or that everything the five basic senses of touch, taste, smell, sight and hearing experience is all there is to be had, and anything else is imagination, hallucination or delusion. To scientific realists, only one neutral arena of reality exists, and that one arena accounts for everything and everyone in existence. However, and much to the chagrin of realists, both neuroscience and modern physics are actually beginning to disprove scientific realism, by demonstrating it to be an optical delusion of consciousness.
Dr. Candace Pert's Experimental Instrumentalism
These images cause neuropeptides to interact with the various hormone centers located along the spinal column in our bodies (and that correlate directly with our seven chakra plexuses). Once this interaction takes place, corresponding mental, emotional and physical actions or reactions occur.
Instrumentalism in Action: The Color Spectrum
Inherent Subjectivity Versus "Scientific Objectivity"
Stop. Look around you. Take inventory of this exact moment: Sounds, smells, touches, tastes, sights, take it all in. In no way does this moment stand alone or apart from every other moment leading to this one. Rather, each and every one of the moments in your life plays an inseparable part in all moments to come. In other words, your perception is based solely on subjectivity. Subjectivity means we view the world, as well as our places within it, as nothing more or less than the sum of our personal experiences. It is impossible to detach ourselves from our experiences or to view the world outside of ourselves from a non-judgmental standpoint. Subjectivity stands in contrast to the theory of objectivity.
Metaphor and Narrative
Think for a moment about all the factors influencing your subjective perception of reality, including:
Narrative vehicles rely on subjective language to transmit metaphors. Language itself is rife with bias, because societies create and sustain language based on shared subjective viewpoints. One of the easiest ways to understand the power of subjective language when transmitting metaphors via narrative devices is a social event. The way someone recalls a social event to other people is based solely on one’s subjective relation to that event. After all, the same event, situation or interaction can mean totally different things to two people depending on which side of the tracks, or for that matter the border, one stands on when an event occurs. In this way, narrative vehicles provide a body of evidence that exposes and perpetuates a person’s or a society’s subjective metaphorical biases.
Scientists Still Have hormones
Einstein Wasn't the Odd Duck When it Comes To Hormonal Scientists
Bacon believed humans had a religious duty to use their God-given abilities of objectively realist reasoning to read the book of nature. Bacon even went as far as personally penning the religious prophecy presented in the Book of Daniel that states, “Only when humanity, by its own efforts restored its original dominion over nature would Christ come again, to rule on Earth for a millennium—a thousand years—before the general resurrection.”
Chemist and Physicist Robert Boyle agreed with Bacon when he said “The more we learn about the world engine, the more we are persuaded not just of the existence of a creator God, but also of his creative wisdom.” Boyle took his scientific position very seriously from a theological point-of-view. He believed that in the same way the authority to interpret scripture traditionally defined priests, he and his contemporaries were ordained philosophers of nature on behalf of the Protestant-Christian God.
So What Does This mean for Science and scientists?
Well, whatever you want it to mean actually! After all, such must be the case when no two human beings perceive or process reality the exact same. However, what this does mean across the board is that any human being, scientist or not, who claims to be able to somehow shut off their hormones to be able to objectively view reality outside of their own head, is probably actually more biased than anyone else who will own up to the fact that there is no such thing as objectivity or neutrality. Let's face it, we human beings just aren't wired in an objective fashion.
In fact, and based on the overwhelming body of evidence courtesy of Dr. Pert and her contemporaries, both states are scientifically impossible to achieve, and theoretically little more than optical delusions of consciousness of epic, if not epidemic proportions. It isn't that we admit weakness or shortcomings by being honest with ourselves about our own subjective natures. Rather, doing so is taking the first step to scientifically and spiritually understanding anything about our own inner true selves and thus, and outer Universe-at-large we occupy.
If you would like to be counted among those who do, please visit our Services page to learn more about how our scientifically spiritual development services can assist you in your quest...and please don't hesitate to contact us with any questions you might have.
DONATE SECURELY VIA PAYPAL HERE
Please help keep The Human Radio Educational Research Project online. To learn more about how you donations help us and others in kind, please visit our Services page. To make a donation directly, please click on the PayPal icon below.