Problems of Science: Vulgar Materialism

2024 Author: Seth Attwood | [email protected]. Last modified: 2023-12-16 15:55

With this article I continue my story about the problems of science. Surely you have heard (and more than once) how we are often told from the TV screen: “scientists have proved that …”. And, as a rule, after a while this phrase from the box of one of your opponents takes its place in the arsenal of blanks for verbal polemics. Moreover, the validity of the application of such a statement is considered to be proven by scientists automatically. These and other statements of scientists often turn out to be only superficial, simplified (vulgar) interpretations of some observations, and the worst thing is that these statements are declared a universal law, on the basis of which absolutely any convenient conclusions can be drawn. So, we will talk about vulgar materialism (hereinafter VM).

In the first part I will show you where you can find VM in science, and in the second - what kind of reflection it has in everyday life.

Note that under "vulgar materialism" in this article is understood not quite what F. Engels meant, who gave this name to a certain circle of materialists. Representatives of this "philosophical" trend denied the specifics of consciousness and its social nature, and instead viewed consciousness as a physiological function of the body. Vulgarity was understood in the sense of "strong simplification", made on the basis of simple analogies. For example, Vogt wrote: “Just as there is no bile without a liver, just as there is no thought without a brain; mental activity is a function or a function of the substance of the brain”.

VM did not develop in any philosophical direction, but it has its own history and its classics. It's not really about that. Here I deliberately give words a slightly different [simplified] meaning: materialism is understood as an attempt to explain a phenomenon based solely on factors external to this phenomenon, in which, moreover, the role of reason and internal values of a person related to phenomenon. The word "vulgar" means "superficial", that is, not strictly proven or made on the basis of simplified concepts.

Why is this topic raised? It turns out that the VM, which, according to scientists, existed in the middle of the 19th century, almost completely reigns supreme in our time. Not in all areas of science, of course, and I do not set myself the goal of sorting the whole science on the shelves, no. I just want to show examples of vulgar materialistic ideas that take place both in scientific circles and in our everyday life.

In general, VM can often be observed in Western scientists when they conduct another experiment, as a result of which it turns out that X% of people have property A, Y% of people have property B and Z% of people have property C. Great! It would seem: an interesting observation, you can imagine this distribution and try to understand what it would mean. However, the experiment itself is often a complete nonsense, performed in order to demonstrate the expected result in advance (for example, it could be a government order). But this is only one part of the problem, not the most important one. The main problem is that instead of discussing the results, scientists immediately elevate them into the framework of an irrefutable law, from which it will certainly be the same in any situation, in any society and in any time: A – B – C and everything (even with taking into account some error). What does this lead to?

For example, in one of the manuals of the Spirit of the Time movement, called the Activist Orientation Guide, we read something like the following (free translation): followed by an increase of 6.7% in the murder rate, 3.4% in the level of violence and 2.4% in the level of vandalism. " Moreover, this is pronounced in the context of the fact that our system of relations is bad. This example, as it were, should once again show that the cause of all the troubles of mankind is what? For example, in money (or in cabbage … here you can put ANY word, say, "weather", and in the same way prove that the cause of troubles is in the "weather": it was cold, and a person stole clothes from a neighbor on the planet). By the way, did you know that there is a strong connection between the length of a person's foot and the level of his intelligence? Proving this is very simple: take a representative sample of people (of different ages) and start measuring foot length and IQ. Find that the longer the stop, the higher the level (or vice versa). Here, friends, we have opened a new law, now in the application form, get ready to see the "shoe size". It is quite obvious that our thoughts about shoe size do not take into account a third-party factor: the physical age of a person, after all, it will be difficult for newborns to answer questions from an IQ test.

Another problem of this experiment is that scientists have once again proved that a person is not to blame for anything by himself, but the cause of the problems is IN EXTERNAL factors that do not depend on consciousness, rationality, and the experience of the person himself. That is, we are witnessing typical materialism. This category includes any experiments designed to show, for example, that the cause of degradation is money and power, the reason for unprofessional work is poor education at a university, the cause of depression is a lack of chocolate, the reason for abortion is poor financial situation, etc.

Another example, if you will, is the "Stanford Prison Experiment", the full description of which can be easily found on the Internet. The short point is that several volunteers were supposed to play "prison". Some became a guard, and some became a prisoner. The inmates and guards quickly adapted to their roles. The guards began to show sadistic tendencies, and the prisoners fell into great stress when they were already truly humiliated. The experiment quickly became a reality for the participants, so it was canceled ahead of schedule.

Again, let's say the experiment was perfect and the results were good. But what do scientists conclude? But: a social role influences human behavior. Under certain conditions, people change because of the role they need to fulfill. This, of course, is the case, because the motives and values of a person depend on ideas about those in the society in which he is brought up. But the conclusion that a person is spoiled (or corrected) by his social role is just an example of a vulgar materialistic interpretation. Often, when they want to show that a certain person with power and money degrades faster than others, they mention this very experiment and say: “money ruined it” (substitute any word for “money”), just as the guards were ruined by the power over prisoners …

Vulgar materialistic ideas can also manifest themselves in unsuccessful attempts to extrapolate certain observations. For example, it is clear that in some cases a person acts predictably in advance. For example, if he falls and hits, he will surely grab the bruised place. If you tell him a funny anecdote, he will laugh. That is, there are a lot of situations like "if … then …" one can think of, and most people in "normal" conditions will do exactly what such "if-then" -algorithms predict.

If you look at this observation in a vulgar way, you get the impression that a sufficient number of this kind of "production rules", united in the "consciousness" of a computing machine, can make it think no worse than a person. The creation of artificial intelligence (AI) in a similar way is currently embodied in the form of so-called expert systems, which, taking into account the previously known context and the previously known situation, are able to give advice in the same way as an expert does. However, of course, this cannot be called intelligence in the full sense. Even when the first computers appeared, scientists said that AI would be created in 20 years. Twenty years passed, then another 20, and each time they said that they were about to understand how the human brain works. If scientists continue to follow VM, then they will never create AI. A similar fate awaits those who believe that it is necessary to create a "sufficiently large" neural network, train it "well enough", etc. All these arguments are based solely on the study of factors external to a person, on the study of his behavior, reactions, without even trying to dig in his head. Scientists do not want to understand even such a simple thing as the ability of a person to think absurdly and that he often does this even under completely normal circumstances. A person has an immanently inherent free will, the ability to both resist external factors and obey them. But for vulgar materialists this is too difficult, they will think that human activity is the totality of his reactions to his environment.

The "if … then …" approach is also characteristic of modern sociology, psychology and other humanities, where, based on general observations of human behavior, far-reaching conclusions are made about what a person or society will do in certain similar conditions. If all these experiments are to be believed, then our society is a completely deterministic system, and randomness is the result of a misunderstanding of the laws of this system. One gets the impression that everything completely and completely depends on external causes and you just need to study them, then create an ideal habitat for Homo Sapiens and … Further this "and" discussion is meaningless, at least for now.

Some time ago it was believed that medicine is able to defeat all diseases, because it is enough just to study them all and come up with a medicine for each. That's how simple everything is, only for some reason people are still sick and die. Should I wait? Is it just about the next flu virus will be defeated soon, and with this eternal happiness will come? So the health problems of many people are due to damned diseases, and not because they do not want to take care of their health? Do you understand? If you think in this way, then external factors are always to blame for everything, and this is so obvious that it does not occur to you to look for the reason in something else.

Another example of VM is related to the field of science well known to me - Computer Science. There are problems that people solve with a computer (as a rule, there are too many calculations for one person with a calculator). There is an opinion among theorists that any complex problem can be solved on a computer, it is enough just to come up with a mathematical model, a solution algorithm or a formula, program all this and run it. If the program is running slowly, you need to take the computer faster. I have read more than once in scientific papers statements like “using Theorem 1, you can solve the problem for any value of the input parameter n”. In practice, it turns out that the theorem only works up to "n = 10". For other values of the parameter n, the computing power of all computers on the Earth is simply not enough. So-called theorists are often convinced that someone else should be doing the effective implementation of their conclusions, and they think that with a sufficiently competent approach, effective implementation is possible. But in reality, these formulas almost always remain just beautiful toys.

By the way, scientists have proven that a statement that begins with the words “scientists have proven” has never been proven by scientists. [Folk wisdom].

Problems of Science: Vulgar Materialism. Part II

In the first part of the article, it was about how scientists powder the brain of ordinary people. In fact, there are very, very many purposeful methods of misleading in science. But the article dealt with irresponsible delusions, that is, when scientists, subject to materialistic ideas (believing that absolutely everything in the world happens according to objective laws that do not depend on consciousness) and who do not want to learn to think more broadly, simply do their job. And the public, desiring new "knowledge" and "explanations" of all problems in the World, swallows the result of scientists' creativity without hesitation. When this is mixed with the unwillingness of the public itself to turn on the brain, the result is even more vulgar materialism (VM). This audience will now be discussed. How is vulgar materialism reflected in everyday life? Basically, typical examples of VMs will be collected here, many of which anyone will find in their life. Further, the militant supporters of "scientific" materialistic ideas are forbidden to read.

By the way, what does science have to do with it? The fact is that science is done by the same people who make up our society. All scientists, despite the fact that they studied, are prone to the same typical delusions as other people. Errors are passed from scientists to people, and from people to scientists. Therefore, in the first part it was about the stupidity of scientists, and in this part it will go about the stupidity of the people. Many people develop a rather strange attitude towards science as an absolute truth. According to many, science is the truth and it is. But all these people, apparently, did not even try to open a textbook on the philosophy of science in order to understand that this is a complex and multifaceted phenomenon. I recommend reading the work of Merton "the ambivalence of scientists" and the magnificent work written by more than one generation of scientists called "physicists are joking." It's time to stop thinking that scientists are somehow different from ordinary people in their delusions. Well, now let's talk about people.

In everyday life, many people, without knowing it, build their lives in accordance with superficial materialistic ideas. For instance. If we look at a person, we will see that, in general, he only eats, sleeps, laughs and does other primitive things. In addition, a person often directs his more complex activities (work, research, reflections) precisely to ensure that primitive actions are obtained as best as possible, and in order to perform them as comfortably as possible. It is enough to look around and see that everyone is shouting only about entertainment, food, housing problems, the dollar exchange rate, etc. From these superficial observations, many have the impression that a person lives precisely in order to consume. The motto of modern society as interpreted by Mr. Freeman's it sounds like this: "Fat * th - Wed * th - Wh * th!". So, this is a typical vulgar materialistic idea: since a person in the process of life consumes food and has fun, it means that he lives to consume and enjoy. This conclusion is an example of VM, there is no place for such concepts as "consciousness", "free will", "values" and others. It is very easy to manage such people: you just need to promise a freebie, and they themselves will ruin the country and in general will do any stupid thing. And then they will whine that everything is bad. But they will think that everything is bad, not because their value system is primitive, but because the government is bad, people are evil and selfish, and officials are sawing money. At the same time, the people themselves, as it were, are not to blame for these problems. It is not their fault that they were bred like children for candy. Feel the contradiction? Where does it come from? Obviously, the contradiction arises in the fact that the value system is somehow arranged "not so". Think.

Here is one example in the topic, given on the forum "World of the Future". “Doesn't it seem silly to you to observe yourself (people) from the outside, and then draw a conclusion from this observation about the meanings and goals of your actions? It’s like, for example, you went to a bakery for bread, on the way you forgot why you were going and where, and began to think - what is my goal? What am I doing? If I walk, for example, down Pushkin Street, then my goal is to reach the end of Pushkin Street”© BSN.

A continuation of this delusion (that consumption is the engine of everything and that all these needs are the same for everyone) is the idea that everything has already been done and is ready for a person to finally stop knowing the World, delve into the incomprehensible and begin to reap the fruits of the Great Discoveries of their ancestors. They, like, did everything so that we, like, devoured everything. Many people really believe that the answer to any question already exists (you just need to find the right book), that all the problems have been solved, all possible plots for films and books have already been written, etc., etc. Even among students there is a strange idea, as if all the tasks that they receive as homework have already been solved, you just need to "google". Yes, yes, one day I give a student a problem (I had to write a program that does some calculation), and the first thing he does is ask: "What is the name of the standard function that does this?" That is, it does not even occur to a person that he needs to write some program code HIMSELF and COMPLETELY AGAIN, but he stupidly does not realize that this task is new and there is no solution ANYWHERE. You can laugh, but it is. In the minds of people, the idea is firmly rooted that everything is already ready for them to simply live. And the concern about how successful they will live should be shifted to the state and smart scientists, who, instead of knowing the World, should come up with how it is more convenient for an ordinary person to sit on the toilet (substitute any other process instead of "sitting on the toilet").

That is why, by the way, science is becoming more and more applied, and its fundamental part is increasingly decaying as unnecessary. That is, the expansion of the boundaries of knowledge is of little interest to anyone. Everyone is interested in "Innovation!" How many times have you heard this word on TV? It is specially designed for consumers and has a magical effect on them.

The limit of such a consumer position is, for example, the theory of the "Golden Billion", according to which one billion people should simply live in comfort, and a number of other people should serve them this comfort. Another utter nonsense is that the West, "more successful" in terms of consumption, should use Russia as a "pipe". In Russia, 15 million people should remain to service the pipe and women (both for export and for internal "use"). The latter theory is the real plan of economists. It is not yet known how scientific this is, but all formalities may soon be completed. Do you feel how philistine habits are quickly becoming a science? Exactly.

While we're on the subject of education, let's look for VMs there as well. For example, at one conference, my colleague watched from the side of a dispute between teachers. The dispute began with the sounding of such a problem: there was a certain class in one school. It had 10% of poor students, 20% of C students, 40% of good students and 30% of excellent students (I wrote all the percentages conditionally, for example). What to do with Losers? They do not want to study, they take away the nerves and time of teachers. Let's kick them out of school! If they don't want to study, don't. Well, they kicked out. After one academic quarter, the "law of self-similarity" worked on the remaining students and there were still about 10% of poor students in the class, 20% of C students, etc. What to do? Oh, trouble! Kick out again? I would suggest sending teachers to the construction of the Baikal-Amur Mainline. In any case, one must first think, and not offer superficial and seemingly obvious solutions, which, moreover, are based on incorrect materialistic ideas. The funny thing is that all this was seriously discussed at a scientific conference as a kind of new scientific problem.

Another amusing series of VM examples is related to everyday life. For example, a girl is depressed. What to do? Scientists somewhere in the next talk show shook their faces: "Research has shown that chocolate saves from depression." Well, the girl is going to eat chocolate. Let's say it helps. Depression again? - Chocolate. Depression? - Chocolate, Depression? - Chocolate. Somewhere there was such a study: a bird was taught to receive food when it knocks on a button with its beak. She knocks, food pours out. Once the button was turned off. The poor bird hammered into this button like a woodpecker for a very long time. Has something to do with girl and chocolate, right? As a result, it may happen that the girl will have other problems (obesity, diabetes). What to do?

This situation is absurd: instead of looking for the cause of depression in his head, a person will try to look for it in external factors that may have nothing to do with the real cause. Instead of solving their problem, the person will look for a way to get rid of the consequences of this problem.

Another example: a person is sick. What to do? Hmm, let's go to the doctor - he will prescribe the medicine. After all, all the medicines have already been made. May the treatment be successful. Again he fell ill - again medications. Ill again - again drugs. And then, with round eyes, he looks into the wallet: "Here are the doctors, bastards, they took all the money." And think and find the cause of the disease? And start to monitor your health? And stop eating vodka, stop smoking? Why stop eating vodka? - After all, there is such a pill, I drank it in the morning - and no hangover! One time I was brought up by the phrase of a man on the street who said to another: “I’m bad, yesterday I was poisoned by low-quality vodka!”. See how it turns out: the vodka was of poor quality, and the person himself seemed to be not to blame. The vodka is to blame. Comrades, do you feel how much absurdity there is in such primitive reasoning? This kind of thought can still be categorized as "saving arguments."

So it turns out that there are hamburgers, and there are diet pills; there is tobacco and anti-nicotine drugs; there is vodka and anti-hangover, etc. People are beginning to be torn apart by this set of contradictions and they are simply disoriented. They can no longer adequately assess their actions, think, draw conclusions. All their thinking becomes concentrated on the primitive things of a personal and "circumstantial" nature. This is how the popular wisdom is born: "what to eat to lose weight?"

VM manifests itself even in matters of faith, where there seems to be no materialism. For example, many are convinced that God is a kind of supernatural being who rewards a person according to his deeds. Those who are more advanced in this matter believe that God is not a being, but still something concrete (to which one can apply the phrase "It is" or "It is not") and still reduce faith in God to the formal observance of certain rules, dogmas, the Laws of God, endowing this essence with certain selective abilities. Say, who behaves well - that will be good, and who behaves badly, that will be bad. Of course, “good” and “bad” are emotionally evaluative labels. For many, it is either beneficial to believe (God will reward for this), or it is scary not to believe (what if Hell exists?), So both of them, purely formally and without hesitation, observe various religious rituals. Nobody can explain their meaning. It is necessary and that's it. And those who do not believe (and are not afraid) act even more stupid: they may believe that there is no God, which means that there will be no punishment for what they have done, so you can do any nasty things, the main thing is not to get burned in public.

Here, in matters of faith, the so-called emotional thinking, which most people are exposed to in our time, is also demonstrated. For example, many opponents of religion consider it their duty to mention Tertullian's phrase "I believe, for it is absurd!" "Yeah," say the opponents, "you deliberately believe in the absurd." In fact, firstly, Tertullian did not say this phrase (he said another phrase that was paraphrased into this one), and secondly, its meaning is not that a person believes in absurdity, but that there are life such things that cannot be explained at once. For example, something has happened that is incomprehensible to a person (does not fit into his logic, and, therefore, absurd for him). He cannot explain it at once, but the fact HAPPENED right in front of him, and it cannot be denied. What to do? It remains only to believe in this absurdity. Over time, a person can rethink his wrong logic and the absurdity for him will cease to be such. This I gave an example of a different understanding of this phrase. That is, one must understand that not everything is as obvious as it seems, especially when it comes to phrases said many centuries ago.

Modern people who are not particularly inclined to delve into their minds, but prefer to blame everything on external circumstances, then can become scientists and continue the grandiose theater of the absurd, but from the position of their "authoritative opinion". There is no difference between the conclusions of such people and the stories of Baba Mani from the neighboring yard.

Why am I saying this? To the fact that the vulgar way of thinking is unacceptable for modern society, but it is firmly rooted in it. We must first think, and then draw conclusions. It must be understood that any statement can be relative and true only in some context, in any one situation. Many people simply do not understand the relativity of their declarations, they elevate ANY phenomenon (understood to the best of their abilities) in the framework of a law that works EVERYWHERE and ALWAYS THE SAME, and factors that do not depend on a person are chosen as the initial premise for triggering. And if this law also "lies on the surface" (intuitively follows from particular circumstances), then, most likely, this is typical VULGAR MATERIALISM. Avoid thinking in this way, and may reason be with you.

By the way, did you know that another Internet poll showed that 100% of people have access to the Internet?