Re: The Quest for Scientific Objectivity

[Dan Fiscus <***>]

Howard,

Re: this:

Howard Pattee wrote:
> HP: Of course it is obvious that science's objectivity is irrelevant for 
> most people. Most people still think the sun rises and sets, and that 
> Copernicus and Galileo had a pushy agenda. Quantum theory and relativity 
> are completely off their charts along with Rosen's impredicativities. 
> But by what logic or value system do you conclude that these models are 
> just as "authentic, real and valid" as the more objective science models?
>
>  From your statement I would have to conclude that a chipmunk's world is 
> just as real and authentic. Do you not distinguish degrees of 
> objectivity and authenticity in a model? Is the ideal of seeking 
> objective truth of no value to you?
>
> Howard

On the contrary, I see so much value in objective truths that
I assert that not only must we seek and develop those general
truths themselves (like texts or statements), but we must also
sustain and nurture the contexts in which those general truths
"live" on, continue to have meaning, and in so doing are able to
remain true in the most general sense, over the most time and
in the most number and diversity of contexts. Thus there are
two threats to a hypothetical truth - that it be falsified itself,
and that its context for meaningfulness cease to exist.

To do this also requires spanning or relating inequivalent values
bases or dealing with inquivalent results from inequivalent
models. In this way no one unique and authentic value system
need to dominant, subjugate or subordinate another, and any
pair can co-exist in peace and equality even if radically different
in terms of knowledge, truth, meaning, implications. To resolve
the conflicts between apparent contradictions is not best done in
predicative sense - either/or is true, one wins and the other loses
- but in impredicative sense - both win and live on, an open-ended
paradox that must continually be resolved. Light's dual nature as
both particle and wave is a good example. Neither model or truth
will ever or should ever "win" or subordinate the other.

Dan