Message from Krassimir Markov:
---------------------------------------------------------------
a response to *"The Background to Modern Science"*
*Introduction*
The interrelations between scientific and non-scientific creating and
perceiving the information and information models as well the proper
attitude to the world cultural heritage is one of the main problems to
be investigated. The world common information bases make possible to
exchange information of any kind. Some information could not be proved
easy, some is assumed as "clear". What is the proper attitude to the
ocean of the information we create and perceive? In addition, now we
have a new phenomenon – artificially created information.
The interrelations between scientific and non-scientific creating and
perceiving the information and information models as well the proper
attitude to the world cultural heritage is one of the main problems to
be investigated. The world common information bases make possible to
exchange information of any kind. Some information could not be proved
easy, some is assumed as "clear". What is the proper attitude to the
ocean of the information we create and perceive? In addition, now we
have a new phenomenon – artificially created information.
* *
*The Modern Societies*
Every group of information subjects, people in particular, forms a
society if there is an agreement for information interactions, by means
of which they could communicate. An important element of this agreement
is the availability of a common information base.
We should not picture the information base like a number of drives with
a certain data recorded, although it is the way it has been since the
beginning – it was recorded on clay plates, papyrus, paper. The ability
for digital storage of the data lays the beginnings of the genesis of
the “modern societies”. It is obvious that, there are as many societies
as many different information bases exist, and a single person could
belong to more than one society.
*The Beliefs*
Defining beliefs, as it should correspond to thousands-years old
concepts is complicated and needs an introductory example.
More than a century ago, on the Christmas Eve, the editor-in-chief of a
big New York newspaper received the following letter:
Dear Mr. Editor,
My name is Virginia, I am 8 years old, and I want to ask you one question.
Does Santa Claus really exist? Mom and dad say he does. The children at
school however, say he does not and that he is only an invention for
kids, which are not grown-up enough to know he is not real.
My dad reads your newspaper every day from end to end. You must be a
very clever man to write so much and so interesting things every day. So
tell me – is Santa Claus real?
That year, on the first page of the Christmas edition of the newspaper
there was a big article by the editor – named “Yes, Virginia, Santa
Claus really exists”.
We may ask ourselves “What is Santa Claus?”.
We could answer: Santa Claus is an information model, which, if followed
one could achieve very delightful results. That is why he does not die.
Santa Claus exists as long as there are people who follow the model. It
is not simple but rather a subject with a great variety of
personifications. From the jolly old man, who the Coca-Cola company
dressed in red, and the Pepsi company – in blue, to the vivid character
of the Russian Ded Moroz who’s wearing a huge fur-coat, a boyar hat and
has a down-to-the-waist beard (some of the distinctions between Santa
Claus and Ded Moroz are pointed out in [Ded Moroz]). Believing in Santa
Claus is actually accepting and following of one of the variations of
his information model.
*The difference between the beliefs and the science*
Every belief is a totality of information models, which are assumed and
followed. Where is the difference between the belief and the science,
which is also a combination of information models to be followed?
The answer is in the way we perceive these models and the attitude to them.
There are two approaches – a hard and an easy one.
The easy one is wonderfully described by the motto of the medieval
theologian Anselm of Canterbury, lately canonized as St. Anselm
(1033-1109): "Credo, ut intelligam!" (I believe in order to understand)
[St.Anselm]. You have to believe in the model, so you could understand
and follow it. This is the religious approach – every subjective notion
can turn into a commonly accepted model or dogma, as long as there is
someone to believe in it and follow it implicitly.
The “difficult” approach is described with the phrase "Intelligo, ut
credam !" (I understand in order to believe), used by the German
reformer Thomas Muentzer (~1490-1525) [Muentzer]. You have to understand
the model and only after then to trust it if possible. This is the
scientific approach – every science builds information models –
hypothesizes, which are repeatedly tested before assumed to be true. The
scientificapproach includes a permanent revaluation and improvement of
the existing models according to the permanently changing environment.
*Conclusion*
In every society, building and exchanging of information models are
basic activities. Whether they are perceived with the “easy” or the
“difficult” approach is a question only of the circumstances, executors
and users.
Keeping in mind the limited abilities of the human brain, we can presume
that the “easy” approach would probably dominate. Just a small part of
the humanity would be able to build and understand the “difficult
scientific information models. The users will not have the strength to
test the models for themselves so the only option left would be to
“believe in order to understand”.
The role and the importance of particular beliefs in a certain society
are determined by the influence of the people ready to doubt the
religious information models, on the others who easily and “blindly”
follow the dogmas. Let remark that in the scientific world the “easy
approach” is everyday practice. We all believe that the scientific works
represent proved facts (maybe by authors). However, who knows? We trust
in authorities.
Several days ago, I received from FIS-list a critique just that I do not
trust in authorities in physics.
Let remember the Lobachevsky's main achievement, which is the
development (independently from János Bolyai) of a non-Euclidean
geometry, also referred to as Lobachevskian geometry.
Sometimes we have to doubt!
That is why the background to modern science is in the wisdom of St.
Augustin (354-430): "Intelligo ut credam, credo ut intelligam!" [St.
Agustin], i.e. in the harmony and dialectical unity of the scientific
and beliefs’ approaches.
*Bibliography*
[Ded Moroz] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ded_Moroz
[St.Anselm] http://webspace.ship.edu/cgboer/middleages.html ,
http://maritain.nd.edu/jmc/etext/hop30.htm
[Muentzer] http://www.thomas-muentzer.de/,
http://www.answers.com/topic/thomas-muentzer
[St.Agustín] http://www.sant-agostino.it/links/inglese/index.htm ,
http://www.conoze.com/doc.php?doc=157
Friendly regards
Krassimir
_______________________________________________
fis mailing list
fis@listas.unizar.es
https://webmail.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
