Is science real ontological knowledge?

Ontological knowledge is not what it seems

In this article I use 3 epistemic notions to show how our mind apprehends reality per se and why it is always only an approximation:

The double look: one part of the mind simulates the processes of the real(Real pole),another has intention(Spirit pole). Upward and downward looks exchanged between the two.

Information: upward it is quantitative (from common micromechanisms). Downward it is divided into an infinity of different qualities specific to the individuations it forms.

The inaccessibility of reality per se: we cannot access the authentic information of reality. The upward look is a substitute that needs to install an arbitrary foundation to reality to start. Currently it is from the quantum vacuum and elementary fields that it constructs a pseudo-ontological look.

What puts quality into information?

A problem appears in the definition of information: Why does a quality appear to it with the downward look while only quantities are seen by the upward look? Both looks focus on the same thing: an information structure. Since information is the fundamental building block, does it inherently have a quality or not? If the downward look is alone to see it, the upward can claim that it is an illusion.

But the third notion allows us to contradict this statement: the upward look is not really ontological. It simply applies a form to something it cannot grasp in essence. Purely quantitative information, which we have declared ontological, is not. It always refers to an unknown gestation of reality, towards which we can only launch mathematical hypotheses.

Our mind only knowing how to give it form, it abandons the notion of substance for the real. The information is purely quantitative for the upward look because it does not know what to add to it. It doesn’t see the need for it. The information structure stands on its own. But does it capture all of the truth?

No. Absolutely not. Precisely the qualitative is absent. But it is impossible to get rid of it for one primary reason: we experience it as consciousness. It is our most fundamental experience, the one that has never varied, whereas knowledge is a long series of mutations. Not completed.

The Real pole changes, the experience of the Spirit pole remains. The strongest anchor is there. Paradoxically, it is the origin of the downward look that is the most reliable and permanent, while that of the upward claims to be more fundamental but is in fact a threshold that deepens with the progress of science. This is a bathyscaphe whose performance is improving, but there is no certain bottom to the pit it explores.

The incompleteness of the quantitative

So there is something missing from quantitative information to fully describe reality. The form is a veneer of the Real pole on the essence of reality. She forgets something. With its qualia, the Spirit pole is closer to this essence… since it is one of them. We are monists. If the mind feels, it is because reality does the same. It is not just a series of numbers.

The conclusion is then this: we must not separate substance and information in the ontology of reality. The real is one. Separations are only there to allow our mind to grasp it, to shift from it. The shape is owned by the Real pole. It is the appearance of reality for the mind and not the essence of reality. Quantitative information is a reduction of reality to its appearance. If we had an authentic ontological view, then something more would be added to this quantitative information. It is this something more than the downward look translated into qualities.

The ontology is very qualitative. The upward look misses what is shaped. It obliterates it behind notions such as heat, energy, change. Who have no ontological explanation. No force, no field, no algorithm can define them.

Everything experiences its quality

It is by giving every real thing the opportunity to experience its quality that we become truly monistic.

The paradox is that we remove the qualities of reality by exclusively using the Real pole of the mind to describe it. It uses information as a descriptive tool, purely virtual logical technicality. By dissociating itself from the Spirit pole, the Real pole reduces reality to its structural aspect. This is eliminatory materialism. It can only describe reality by eliminating its own experience. This makes it a false monism, and an authentic dualism between concrete reality and the world of illusions.

Skewed ontology and epistemic

Epistemic reversal of ontological information: it is indeed the mind, through the Real pole, that reduces bottom-up information to a quantitative language. The conception of information that dominates science today is subjective. It can only be objective by reintegrating its qualitative part. Indeed, any observer who determines this quality, whether it is a human mind or qualitatively identical things, is included in the same monistic reality.

The upward look is only a conceptual foundation and is falsely ontological. This is also true for the downward look. It is actually anchored on a conceptual foundation about its own modes of mental functioning. It is falsely epistemic. It is not conscious fusion that judges its parts, but conceptual parts that judge conscious processes. Ascending direction within the mind itself.

Mental experience is the only objectivity

The only real downward look is the experience of the processes. It is to experience the functioning of the mind, the sequence of processes superimposed in the complex dimension. The analysis of the process is always upward, its proven result is always downward

The real is thought by the virtual of science

Heidegger said, “Science doesn’t think.” The philosopher thus translates the idea that science is a pure ontological approach. It is false. Science thinks from the representation it places at the base of the complex dimension. While non-scientific representations (art, religions, fiction) occupy the top. Scientists are heavily constrained by the essence of reality, but all are productions of the mind.

The history of science is that of a religion upset by radical changes in dogma. The essence of reality has never changed. It must have been thought out so that its appearances have changed so much. How could his mask be modeled without some fiction? Science is a permanent interaction between the Spirit and Real poles, in the same way as philosophy.


Leave a Comment

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.