For the discussion of the topic "Modern science and metaphysics: a return to basics?" February 20, 2019, a teacher of the theological faculty of the BSU, Hegumen Yermogen (Panasyuk), visited BSUIR. I BSU, igumen Yermogen teaches future theologians the subject "History of the formation of the modern picture of the world", where the issue of the development of science plays an important role. During the conversation, the task was to characterize modern science and relate it to such a concept as metaphysics.
The emergence of the very concept of metaphysics - is a historical curiosity. The copyist of the works of Aristotle, thus headlined one of the treatises of the great Greek philosopher, who simply located immediately behind the treatise on physics. The word "metaphysics" literally means "behind physics", i.e. outside of physics. This treatise dealt with the fundamental foundations of being. Aristotle, as well as all of Antiquity as a whole, does not separate natural science from philosophy, therefore in "metaphysics" he talks about objects that are like semantic braces of our being, generalize the reality that we see in the external world. The same approach is preserved in the Middle Ages, where ideas about the functioning of the natural world were directly related to theological concepts. However, by the end of the Middle Ages, what was considered to be inextricably linked (ie, God and His creations) begin to divide. The idea of a "double truth" appears, its supporters argue that it is necessary to separate the truths of Christianity, in which one can only believe, and those data on nature that can be substantiated with the help of human reason. It was the first step to divorce between "physics and metaphysics". Naturally, in the future, this gap has become even deeper. Starting from the XVI-XVII centuries. they begin to assert that no metaphysics (no supersensible representations) are needed to explain the natural laws, it is enough just to set up experiments and generalize the results with the help of mathematics, thus coming to certain laws. In this direction, one can see the development of the "Occam's razor" principle, which states that one should not "multiply entities without extreme necessity", i.e. that one should not involve metaphysical concepts in the explanation of what can be explained by simpler "earthly" concepts.
Nevertheless, it is a historical fact that the creators of modern European science (Bacon, Descartes, Newton, and others) were believers, all of them in one way or another engaged in metaphysics (that is, they confessed one or another idea of supersensible reality — o God) and yet it did not stop them from actively developing science, based on experiment and mathematics. But already in the XVIII-XIX centuries. the scientific world in the person of the French enlighteners seeks to completely abandon the metaphysical concepts. The historical case is known when S. Laplace, presenting his scientific treatise to Napoleon in response to the emperor's question, why the book does not mention God anywhere anywhere, said: "Sire, I do not need this hypothesis." Developing in this direction towards the end of the XIX century. there is a science in its modern understanding, as something separate from philosophy and theology. However, although there was a separation of science from metaphysics, nevertheless, unnoticed by itself, science begins to base itself on a new metaphysics, which is called materialistic ("holy place is never empty"). Scientists begin to relate to their activities as to what emerges from the materialistic picture of the world and, which ultimately confirms it. Already in the XIX-XX centuries. scientists philosophers and physicists (in particular, Ernst Mach and Pierre Dugem), having noticed such a relationship between science and metaphysics, begin to assert that science should not profess any worldview. In this sense, it is wrong to ask a question when a philosophy exam asks to compare the scientific and religious worldview, or the scientific and mythological worldview, since science several centuries ago, by its very course of development, excluded the metaphysical concepts from the circle, its concepts. In confirmation of this, one can cite the phrase attributed to Newton: "Physics fear metaphysics." Developing this idea, Mach and Dugem argued that the main task of science is not to explain this world, but rather to describe it.
How then can one explain such a high authority of science in the public consciousness, if its role is so modest that it cannot explain the phenomena, but only gives a convenient description of the laws? Hegumen Yermogen responds: "The authority of science is explained by the fact that with the help of it many technologies were created that are quite impressive with their effects. Man with the help of science and technology has greatly expanded its capabilities. " However, from the fact that science allows us to control reality does not follow from the fact that science correctly describes reality itself. This is confirmed by the fact that in science often one theory replaces another, and sometimes radically. And in none of the areas of science, we can not be sure that we have reached the truth "in the last resort".
In addition to these issues, many other interesting topics were touched upon in the conversation, related to the current state of science, which is distinguished by its pluralism of opinions. Among modern scholars there are those who are quite sure that the primary basis of being is information ("it from bit"). Others are convinced of the existence of an infinite number of universes (although this defies sensory verification). Others, starting with the materialistic notions that everything in the world (including human consciousness) can be modeled on a computer, come to the idea that our entire civilization is a product of higher beings and is seriously looking for "bugs" in our reality. This is precisely the paradox of modern science, that, having abandoned the concepts of metaphysics, it returns to them again, only at a new stage of its development. And most likely this can be explained by the fact that living people do science. And in a living person, an indestructible thirst is not just an external description of a phenomenon, but an apprehension of its inner meaning.
The Council of Young Scientists expresses its gratitude to Hegumen Yermogen and hopes for new interesting meetings.
|