LS: When did you last here an economist say something like this?
If the observations of the red shift in the spectra of massive stars don’t come out quantitatively in accordance with the principles of general relativity, then my theory will be dust and ashes.
Albert Einstein (1920)
Me: Yes, and also when did you last hear of an economist craft and offer up an Einsteinian-ly radical paradigm changing set of policies that transform the economy by resolving its deepest and most chronic problems? And additionally bases it all on an evolutionary concept that integrates and unifies not only things economic, but the supposed opposites of quantum and temporal realities?
Jaya: Far from being “dust and ashes” Newton’s equations are still in daily use. I learned them in school and demonstrated that they were accurate beyond my ability to measure! And one cannot imagine a generation that will not learn them.
Einstein’s equations make very accurate predictions, but also fail to predict accurately under certain circumstances, i.e. in blackholes and at the big bang. Quantum mechanics tell us that spacetime cannot have infinite curvature.
So the race is on to replace Einstein’s theory with a quantum theory of gravity and/or spacetime. But when it emerges, Einstein’s theory will not be “dust and ashes” because under most circumstances it is still accurate beyond out ability to measure. Generations of physics graduates will still learn about relativity.
Me: Good point. Ideas are built on other ideas, and all realities are real it’s just that some are more integrative and highly refined toward the big picture reality philosophers and sages have described for ages. Science as a mode of inquiry of the truth is working its way back to that more inclusive perspective and will add its empirical perspective to it.
FS: Why do you think that paradigm change will occur in a single step? That never occurred in science!
Me: Because the change doesn’t actually take place until one has a new cognition…of it. It’s completely true that Science is unconscious of the old/current paradigm let alone the new one, then problems in a system or whatever crop up, the orthodox reject it, others keep trying to “fix” the problems, usually in an ad hoc and reformist fashion, finally someone makes a new tool and has a discovery or re-discovers relevant insights from an old tool and the slow poke process Kuhn described begins to be discerned. But nothing even remotely actual, permanent or world shaking occurs….until one sees the new paradigm.
Einstein’s quote is true. It’s left out as I and others here have pointed out that one needs at the very least a good understanding of the basics of an area prior to being able to discern a new paradigm because a paradigm must fit seamlessly within the body of knowledge/area of human endeavor that it applies to, but a paradigm is also a single concept like Homesteading-Agriculture or Helio-centrism that meets the general applicability requirement I just stated. A paradigm is thus an integration of the opposites of singular and multiple, specific and general. And I assert that, as the integration and discernment of the truths in opposites is the very process and attainment of wisdom regarding whatever is being examined, wisdom is the very tool of what I refer to as paradigm perception. And when you’ve perceived a new paradigm you’re way, way ahead of everyone utilizing only the mental mode of science…..because you see both the single concept and how it fits within and transforms the pattern under examination.
Here’s the levels of thought in descending order that Einstein was referring to (you’ll note the wide gap between the top level and those below it denoting the creative and synergistic effect of the integration of opposites and also the historical fact that most scientific breakthroughs are integrations of the opposite modes of thought of the scientific method and an aspect or aspects of consciousness and its tool wisdom):
Wisdom-Paradigm Perception
Philosophy
Theorizing
Data Gathering- Research
