|
Can you falsify the LOTA philosophy
of science?
By Cornel Slenters
The LOTA philosophy of
science is a 'risky' proposition according to the Karl
Popper definition, since it can be potentially
falsified.
This is an important feature since falsifiable theories
enhance our control over error while expanding the
richness of what we can say about reality.
In this section you are invited to falsify the LOTA
philosophy of science and if you succeed you will have
achieved two goals:
- You will have made the LOTA philosophy of science
even better.
- It might make you famous.
Moreover,
you will have two
opportunities for falsification as is illustrated in
this diagram:
Potential gap
towards the right (LOTA understates)
The
LOTA philosophy of science claims to be a logical
proposition based on 'all we know'. Hence, if you have
experienced things in your life which go
beyond the scope of the LOTA philosophy of science,
you have identified a potential gap for falsification.
We refer here to personal experiences and they may
include experiences of people close to you. Important
however: Only experiences count, you have to exclude
theories.
Potential gap
towards the left (LOTA overstates)
As mentioned, the LOTA philosophy of science is a
'risky' proposition according to the Karl Popper
definition, which means it includes predictions about
the nature of reality that are controversial and
sometimes in conflict with majority views in science.
Here is an example:
The LOTA philosophy of science
suggests that the Darwinian theory of evolution, a
theory currently based on materialism, might be missing
out on additional aspects in the dynamics of evolution
which could be physical or non-physical in nature.
Thus the LOTA philosophy of
science can be
falsified if it can be demonstrated that such
additional aspects do not
exist.
Hence the potential for
falsification is demonstrated.
Nevertheless in practice
this type of falsification is difficult to achieve,
such as in this example on Darwinian evolution where
most of the research is based on ‘methodological
materialism’ and would exclude non-physical aspects
already by policy decision. Thus it cannot demonstrate
the non-existence of an additional dimension.
Moreover one would have to falsify all data that
suggests such a dimension. Here is an example: studies
of migrating birds have established that the energy used
during the migration flight is more than what can be
explained from normal food intake. Hence the data
suggests that these birds absorb energy from their
surroundings during flight. Since energy and information
are closely linked, we see again the suggestion that
there is more to evolution than what the Darwinian
theory of evolution tells us. You might disagree with
this, in which case you need to falsify this
notion.
In
short,
the LOTA philosophy of science makes it easier on the
scientist to study and explore phenomena that are
currently blocked out through limited mental frameworks.
In my view his/her time is better spent on exploring
these new dimensions rather than looking for 'the gap'.
Nevertheless, the opportunity is there and serves as a
component for continuous quality improvement.
Current status
This website offers an
open invitation to falsify the LOTA philosophy of
science by demonstrating that it either overstates or
understates.
Hence we follow a process with built-in features for
error correction, since we do not know what 'reality' is
and use this process of successive approximations based
on 'all we know'.
Where does the LOTA philosophy of
science understate reality?
- No verified
examples on record (since 1996) .
Where does the LOTA philosophy of
science overstate reality?
- No verified examples
on record (since 1996).
The LOTA philosophy of
science as a 'theory of everything' ?
The LOTA philosophy of
science is a logical proposition based on 'all we know',
meaning the entire experience of humanity serves as a
pool of evidence. Consequently, if there is no
falsification possible for LOTA 'understating reality',
then we would have reached the maximum we can hope for,
namely an integral architecture based on scientific
principles that includes all of human experience, a
'Theory of Everything' from the perspective of human
experience. That this is far from a dream scenario is
already demonstrated in the Big Cycle in
evidence link pages.
The LOTA
philosophy of science as a 'theory of everything' would
bring three major benefits:
- It provides new
answers to the ultimate questions of life.
- It points to
largely untapped resources of the creative mind,
from which we can improve 'the state of the world'.
- It provides a
tool for science to falsify 'shaky' theories and
replace them with better propositions.
Footnote:
The notion that a meaningful 'theory of
everything' can be achieved through physics is a
non-starter, since a very large portion of what we find
in contemporary bookstores is not explainable through
physics. While a unified theory of physics is in
principle possible, to claim it then as a 'theory of
everything' would be highly pretentious since it would
exclude major portions of human experience.
Moreover, the emergence of physical reality can be
explained on the basis of the dynamics of consciousness,
as is illustrated through the Big Cycle in
the LOTA philosophy of science and the ebook Breakthrough which
you can download here
for free. If taken the other way, namely a physics
theory which can explain the dynamics of consciousness,
there is nothing around that can stand the test of
'falsification'. If you think there is,
here is another invitation to falsify the LOTA
philosophy of science.
In general, the phrase 'theory of everything' is an
overstatement of what we can expect since we are part of
'the system' and our results will not be complete nor
unique, a statement which applies to LOTA as well as to
any other theory (Gödel). That is why the LOTA
philosophy of science is seen as a process, which
evolves with new insights. Moreover, other 'theories of
everything' are seen as a contribution, provided they
meet such standards as outlined here. In
combination they illuminate different aspects of our
cosmos and may lead to new insights.
Invitation to falsify
This is not for
hip-shooters and it requires serious preparation.
Requirements for entering this dialog are outlined here.
|
|
