‘‘‘Law of Nature’’’ -- E.D.
Definition.
Dear
Reader,
I want to share with you, in this blog-entry, the full “Working
Definition” of the term ‘‘‘Law of Nature’’’ from our
forthcoming Encyclopedia Dialectica, volume 0,
entitled ‘Encyclopedic Dictionary for a Unified Theory of Universal
Dialectics’.
“A ‘‘‘Law of Nature’’’ = That re-definition which is the positive fruition of our
dialectical, immanent critique of the substance, analogy, connotations, and ‘‘‘fetishism’’’ of
prevailing “Laws of
Nature” tropes. Science cannot empirically validate the
connotation of a Laws-giving God who decrees His “eternal Laws of Nature”
from His heavenly, transcendental throne.
Nor does ‘exo-human’ Nature exhibit any ‘‘‘legislature’’’, which might
promulgate such “Laws”,
nor any ‘‘‘army’’’ and ‘‘‘police force’’’ which might enforce any such. Nor can “Laws of Nature”, as mere textual,
including equational, jottings, mere ink on paper, detectably affect,
let alone “govern”, or “enforce”, the ways in which the phenomena
of Nature observably behave. Much of such tropes and subliminal
analogies arise, we hold, from the ‘retro-projection’ and ‘exo-projection’ of
the semi-conscious shadows and
silhouettes of once-prevailing human-social relations of production, projected onto ‘pre-human’
and ‘exo-human’ Nature, during times -- right up until today
-- in which most of Terran
humanity has been unconscious even of the
general concept of humanity’s
“social relations of production”, let alone of how those social relations subliminally
inculcate contra-scientific
ideologies.”
“Therefore, a ‘‘‘Law of Nature’’’ must be, at
best, a precise description, by means of human[oid], phenomic
language -- phonogramic,
ideogramic, pictogramic, or via any combination among the three -- of human-experience(s).”
“These experience(s) may be of ‘‘‘raw’’’, ‘‘‘in
vivo’’’ Nature.
Or,
they may be of ‘‘‘in vitro’’’, humans-contrived, by-humans-constrained, or restricted, ‘designed experience(s)’, or ‘‘‘scientific experiment(s)’’’.
“In either case, or in cases which involve a combination of the two kinds of experience(s), the experience(s) are of a pattern of
action/change in such Nature,
which is seen
to recur,
with an [often]
‘‘‘unscaled
self-similarity’’’ among the instances
of this recurring
pattern.”
“Synchronically, this pattern must be seen to recur in many «loci» in presently known cosmological space, at any given, presently humanly-observed or reconstructed “date” in cosmological time* -- in cosmological ‘Nature-al’
history. “Hold time
constant”, and
this pattern must still hold throughout observable space.”
“Diachronically, e.g., from any one of many accessible locations in cosmological space, this pattern must be seen to recur over a succession or range of observed or reconstructed “dates”
in cosmological
time. “Hold space
constant”, and
this pattern must still hold throughout
observable time.”
“A ‘‘‘Law of Nature’’’ is NOT -- as the habitual, misleading
figure of speech that we
hear incessantly in “scientific”
discourse today
would logically imply -- any kind of actual agent/subject in and of itself, that actively “governs” ‘Nature-al’
events, or
phenomena, outside of or
external to the human
minds
that “hold” it, and outside of the human artifacts that externally
express, e.g., the equation of that ‘‘‘Law’’’, in ‘‘‘object ification’’’ -- in ‘object-ive’ form -- i.e., on paper, on screen, or on a rock wall,
“carved in stone”.”
“Such figures of speech subliminally inculcate an idealistic, or a theistic, or a magical inversion of subject/agent and object -- instancing again that very mode of inversion which is so diagnostic
of capitalist-epoch
ideology.”
“A real,
scientific ‘‘‘Law of Nature’’’ is governed by the observed events,
the observed
phenomena that it addresses -- not the other way around!”
“Moreover, a proper ‘‘‘Law of Nature’’’,
as such a description, not only does not implicitly identify itself
as, somehow, the cause of the phenomena
of the domain
of Nature
that it addresses, but, instead, explicitly
identifies the actual, physical, real world causal agents,
or [proto-]subjects, whose inherent
actions actually cause the pattern of action/change which the
human-subjective,
‘artefactual’
‘‘‘Law’’’
expresses or
represents. Moreover, a proper ‘‘‘Law of Nature’’’ need accrue no presumption of ‘‘‘eternality’’’: it too may change, as the ontology of Nature changes/expands itself, and as its
real agents evolve and ‘meta-evolve’
their «modi
operandi».”
*[E.D. Editors: As
regards how one may identify a universal ‘cosmological time’, given the
constraints on simultaneity inherent in the Special and General Theories of
Relativity, see Lee Smolin, Time Reborn, Houghton Mifflin
Harcourt, NY: 2013, pp. 164-171.].
FYI: Much of the work
of Karl Seldon, and of his collaborators, including work by “yours truly”, is
available for free-of-charge download via --
ENJOY!
Regards,
Miguel Detonacciones,
Member, Foundation Encyclopedia Dialectica
[F.E.D.],
Officer, F.E.D.
Office of Public Liaison
No comments:
Post a Comment