This page contains the summaries of the complex of articles concerning our Scientifc Manifesto. These articles attempt to establish a historical and logical context for our study of Information Dynamics. This includes a differentiation from the faith-based religion of Scientism, which is based upon Science.
Object analysis for Matter – Process analysis for Living Systems Traditional Western Science is object based - with the interaction between objects and the innate forces of nature as the primary focus of research. However, Living Systems require a process-based explanation due to the ongoing relation between organism and environment – a continuous loop until Death claims her prize. The complexities of Living Systems challenges the object-based analysis of matter science. Based in process analysis Information Dynamics attempts to fill this gap.
Building the Wall of Process Logic The logic of traditional Western scientific explanation is grounded in an object-based Syllogism. Deduction correctly reasons that the Particular Members of Set S will have the same General Features as Set S. Similar, but fallacious, is the Correspondence syllogism, which assumes set equivalence due to feature equivalence. Similar, but logically consistent, is the defining Syllogism of Process-based Science, which concludes that the Particular Members of a Process Set P will have the same general features as Set P. The Syllogistic Reasoning applies equally to object & process based sets. Employing analysis based in this process logic BD explores huge swatches of human experience that Object analysis ignores
Differences in the Processes of Matter, Life, & Conscious Attention Both Matter and Life go through processes. While fixed equations with initial conditions and exact functions precisely delineate these automatic material processes, they struggle with regeneration, a fundamental process of Living Systems. Fractal Regeneration, the math of BD, is specifically designed to describe these mechanisms. Conscious Attention, an even deeper level of behavioral complexity, is modeled by the Creative Pulse, an extension of Fractal Regeneration.
Check out “Data Stream Momentum” for an understanding of some of the innate processes of Fractal Regeneration. To explore the processes of Sustained Attention refer to “The Creative Pulse” & “CP Applications”. To discover the material component to this whole mess check out Newton’s extensions in the world of modern science.
As a contrast to the identical logic that underlies both Matter Science and Process Science read about “The Religion of Scientism” – the pseudo science that disguises itself as a science by wrapping itself in unproved correspondences between Matter and Life. Or check out “The Emergence of Scientism” to see how this ideology arose – the history of the shifting paradigm of the correspondence between Matter & Life.
As an evolutionary trait humans acquired the ability see their world in terms of motivations – Theory of Mind. The derivative talent of discerning subtexts to behavior, especially the desires of a Leader, facilitated tribe formation – cooperation for survival. Applying this mental mechanism indiscriminately they ascribed motivations to Life, Matter, & even seemingly Random occurrences – which they attributed to the Divine Sphere. This in turn led to the almost global belief that the Universe, whether God, gods, or Nature, reveals Divine Will through these seemingly Random events. This state of affairs was refined due to the growing ability of ancient astronomeia, which culminated in Ptolemy’s Tetrabiblos, to precisely predict planetary positions. This indisputable insight split the Universe into a Chaotic Earth & Orderly Heavens, which revealed its Divine Will via planetary motion - astrology – ascribing underlying motivations to the sky. Newtonian Physics, with its absolute laws, obliterated the notion that Matter has motivations. Further the demonstrable force of gravity inextricably linked the Matter of Heaven and Earth as one through mathematical formulas. With this insight Science split the Universe into Orderly Matter and Chaotic Life – further refining the motivation paradigm.
From Chaotic Universe - to predictable Heavens - to predictable Matter - the implications were inexorable. Only Humans have motivations & maybe not even them. Just as our ancient relatives believed that even matter had a soul, perhaps we too still ascribe motivations too indiscriminately - went the reasoning. However this inference has proved Indeterminate over the centuries, as there is no supporting empirical evidence. Despite this lack of evidence a large subset of the educated and those aligned with them – the followers of Scientism – continue to maintain this belief, which has become implicit. Due to their alignment with Science, Scientism’s followers have adopted a sense of logical superiority over those who still ascribe underlying motivations to anything not human, including random occurrences – Divine Omens. This unsupported intellectual arrogance has lead to antipathy between Science & Religion.
An implicit belief of Scientism is that scientists will eventually discover the absolute laws and formulas that determine the behavior of Life herself. This indeterminate inference marks Scientism’s Historical Emergence. Further this logical, yet unsupported, inference has informed the scientic community's approach to Living Systems as they have applied Matter Science’s methodology to Life’s Processes – assuming, the unproven, that there is a direct correspondence between Life & Matter: This non-empirical assumption leads to a headon collision between Scientism, not Science, & Information Dynamics. While Scientism implicitly believes that the Methods of Matter and Life are ultimately One (Tao of Matter = Tao of Life), BD firmly believes that they are distinctly different (Tao of Matter ≠ Tao of Life).
If interested in the implicit beliefs of Scientism read The Religion of Scientism. If interested in an example of how Scientists tried and failed to turn humans into an impersonal blank slate akin to matter read The Failure of the Blank Slate. For a discussion of some essential differences between Matter and Life check out object vs. process analysis in "Logical Foundations" and content vs. context based equations in "BD's Equations".
The ancients, including Aristotle through Kepler, believed that Matter, like Life, has a soul and hence motivations. The notion that matter had a soul came under attack, especially after Newton derived some impersonal and automatic Formulas (his Laws of Motion) that ruled the dynamics of matter. However he also postulated the force of gravity between two objects to explain planetary motion and the fall of apples to the earth. This initially disturbed Newton's scientific community as a occult throwback to an Aristotelian past with matter magically attracting matter from a distance. After a century of dead end research into the nature of gravity, the scientific community accepted this occult attractive force between matter as fact, due to its predictive and theoretical power. Then along came Einstein with his Theory of Relativity, a quarter of a millennium later, to finally reveal the innate nature of gravity.
However, in order to provide the mechanism for gravity, the magical attractive force between bits of matter, Einstein had to explode the traditional Newtonian concepts of a fixed 3D space combined with a separate dimension for time - merging them into a space-time continuum, a field, which was somehow bent. In so doing Einstein' Relativity Theory extended Newtonian concepts to apply to a larger section of the material world. In similar fashion BD explodes both Newtonian elements and concepts to provide a deeper understanding of living systems. Via fractal generation BD employs the traditional Newtonian concepts of momentum and the derivatives of change (albeit in expanded form) – to derive fundamental mathematical processes that are inherent to living systems. In such a fashion Newtonian constructs bridge the Dynamics of Behavior and Matter.
The question frequently determines the nature of the answer. In fact, the shift from the question of Why to How created modern Science. In the attempt to answer the question of 'Why do things behave the way they do?' The ancient philosophers looked for correspondences between matter and life. As such, they attributed human traits to the rest of the Cosmos – for instance streams became demigods with personality. The incredibly influential Greek school of philosophy established by Plato and Aristotle replaces human motivations with Logos as the primary metaphor for understanding the workings of the Cosmos. Although these philosophers employed reason to discern the Why of the Cosmos, they failed to systematically test reason through empirical verification. In contrast, Galileo posed the question 'How do things behave?' This led to systematic observation, data collection, and eventually mathematical formulas to describe the numerical relations. In essence, the question of How led to the scientific method. This was such a powerful and pragmatic explanatory tool that scientists abandoned the more difficult Why question – leaving it unanswered.
Based upon the correspondence, i.e. correlation, between data and formula, the General Scientific Syllogism is testable according to agreed upon standards. Conversely the syllogism of the ancient and Greek philosophers is untestable as it is based upon the correspondence between two phenomena. The introduction of mathematical models into science was incredibly powerful as it allowed extension into unrelated areas due to algebraic manipulations. For instance Newton's formulas connected planets with falling objects, which led to the then revolutionary notion that the laws of motion for Heaven and Earth are identical. The power of the scientific method was based both in the testable nature of the conclusions combined with the extendable nature of the mathematical formulas.
Scientism, the science-derived, faith-based civil religion of the intelligentsia, revived the Why question, asking 'Why does Life behave the way it does?'. Assuming a correspondence between Life and Matter due to Life's material component, the answer was 'Scientific Determinism'. Assuming the same correspondence between Life and Matter and applying the Why question to matter the ancients answer was 'Animism'. Founded in the inherently indeterminate logic of correspondences both conclusions are faith-based. As such Scientism is a religion, even though it derives from Science, which is Logic-based. The underlying faith based assumption of Scientism is that only Matter exists. The How question of Science avoids the discussion altogether - remaining pragmatic, rather than speculative/theoretical/philosophical.
Scientism is one of Earth’s Civil Religions. Civil religions are an implicit belief structure shared by a significant subset of the general population. They are a more powerful motivating social force than Organized Religion. Because of the hidden nature of Civil Religion, Propagandists & Advertisers manipulate the general population via this implicit belief system. Raising these subliminal beliefs to consciousness enables the individual to be proactive rather than reactive to environmental influences. Further it is in this Writer's best interest to expose the hidden tenets of Scientism, as they will inadvertently obstruct the acceptance of BD, as they are diametrically opposed to her underlying principles. Civil Religions emerge over time, which gives them tremendous social power. The religion of Scientism emerged gradually globally due to the ascendance of Technology. The implicit belief structure of Scientism is so pervasive that it has spawned corollary Civil Religions – Nutritionism & Doctorism.
If you are interested in the manifestations of scientism, pursue the following links:
How Copernicus’ epoch changing paradigm shift was motivated by Beauty not Data
How the transition from question of Why to What created Science.
Why Scientism is a Religion.
How Scientism rewrites History to vilify its Shadow.
Copernicus' insight into the nature of planetary orbits, which ultimately inspired the Scientific Revolution, was based on his personal belief as to God's nature. He didn't believe that God would create a messy, complicated planetary system such as was precisely described by Ptolemy. He believed that the complicated Ptolemaic geocentric system was false because of its lack of elegance, not because of problems with the data. He proposed a heliocentric system because it was based in the perfect circle, not because it was a better fit with the data. Copernicus believed that elegant simplicity was one of the features of God and by extension the Universe he created. In short he believed that natural law should have this aesthetic feature. As an extension of this principle scientists have adopted Occam’s Razor as a criterion for evaluating theories. A simple Formula always trumps the Complex.
The scientific community's obsession with discovering natural laws which have the feature of elegant simplicity has yielded fruit so many times that aesthetics is an unquestioned underpinning of scientific formulations. There are many logical reasons for this quest for simplicity. Employing the mechanical model as an example, Nature would favor the simple over the complex, as it would tend to be more stable, durable, and energy efficient. In support of this theory elegant simplicity is a feature of many foundational Scientific Formulas from a variety of diverse disciplines. As such the theory of elegant simplicity is as unquestioned as the theory of gravity by the scientific community. The basic Fractal Regeneration Equation of Information Dynamics fits into this mold – epitomizing elegant simplicity.
There are many parallels between the theories of Copernicus and BD. The General Public can easily understand the insights and implications of both systems. In both cases Theory preceded the Scientific Data, as the introductory paradigm was experience-based. While Copernicus' mathematical handle eventually led to the generation of data and mathematical models that confirmed his theories, BD is looking for real Scientists to test the system. Further frustration with the current paradigm inspired the development of both theories.
As the child of Science, Scientism pretends to be logical, when it is based upon faith. In the attempt to distance themselves from Religion Scientism's followers distort the history of the relation between Science and the Church - vilifying their shadow. Specifically they imply that the Church had a bad relationship with Copernicus & Galileo due to their scientific beliefs. In reality the Pope encouraged Copernicus and Galileo was suppressed primarily for his antagonistic political views. Rather than ideological the conflict between the Religions of Scientism and Catholicism is political – as they are both fighting for political supremacy. As such the Church employs its usual weapons, based in dogmatism and the suppression of new ideas. As the opponent Scientism employs similar tactics. Science is neutral. By differentiating between neutral Science and subjective Scientism, these papers hope to create an opening for the new ideas of BD.
If this has piqued your interest here are some links to related topics:
How Beauty, not Data, inspired Copernicus’ epoch changing planetary theory.
How the transition from the Why to the What question created Science.
Why Scientism is the primary Civil Religion of the global intellegentsia.
The ability to discern the Tao of entities is an evolutionary trait, as it enabled predators, in particular, to adapt to the Tao of their Environment. The Ancient hominids objectified the Tao of inanimate environmental features, such as rivers and mountains, calling them spirits. Employing the Theory of Mind, they even ascribed underlying motivations to these natural forces. This is an accurate way of organizing the world if the Spirit of Matter equals its Tao, as the Universe and other Disembodied Forces also have a Tao, which can be studied.
However the ancients humanized these spirits. They made the superstitious assumption that Human Tao equals the Animal, Plant, Geographical or Universal Tao. They also objectified the Tao, which is a process, not a thing. Instead of features of modality, the ancients turned these into traits of things. They then ascribed human traits and motivations, including intentionality to these objectified processes. This led inevitably to spirit appeasement and sacrifice. This was based in flawed reasoning. The process of climbing a mountain at a certain time might be treacherous, not the mountain or Godhead. The Tao of things was turned into a permanent quality rather than a stage in a process.
Although the Tao of Entities is indisputable, the features of the Tao is highly debatable. As evidence, all the major religions have different versions of the Tao of the Universe. Alternately Science has defined the Tao of Matter relatively precisely – more so for the hard sciences and less so for the so-called softer disciplines.
The hard scientists tend to believe that with time and research that all disciplines will become harder with time. However the complexity of the interactions & inherent imprecision increase with each new layer of emergence. Accordingly the Principle of Emergence predicts that there can be no unified science of everything. Human Behavior is inherently imprecise as it built upon the interacting Taos of Physics, Chemistry, Biology, Psychology and BD.