... rslite said..., comment in "Peeve of the day" post
"Maybe what we know and can use now is not good enough to prove that it works or not. Maybe it does work on a different level that we can't measure yet, or maybe it doesn't work at all and people feel well because of other causes. Where do we draw the line between something that is clearly a joke and something that could be true but we haven't found why yet?"
What we know and can use now is not good enough to prove that it works or not ...
Knowledge, how awesome it might appear, it is still the tip of the iceberg, of what yet, is to be known. It is imperfect, by virtue of not being the whole, of what there is to be known. Or, it never ends, therefore, what we know now, should never be used, to kill off what is to be known in the future.
Should let it grow unhindered. It will find its way.
Should put in mind. Alternative ideas, attack them from any angle possible, contribute if you may, instead of killing them by ridiculing the individuals that foster these ideas.
Instead of, killing thus, any ideas, is better to kill off the urge, to destroy new ideas, again, no matter how absurd they may sound, or how out of reason they might be to us, judged, by what we know now.
Why would someone, would feel compelled to ridicule, the bearers of weird ideas? Their prominent position, assumed in their minds, at stake?
A direct consequence of the prevailing norms of competition, in its worse form, manifestation. What you do not understand and fathom, kill it. All in an attempt to preserve cherished status, in the world of ideas. So that, the ground beneath one's feet, doesn't give in.
The more and more I think about it, the more I am convinced, that these are the makings of the competitive streak, Darwin's theories have left upon us. Compete, to your heart's delight.
However, evidence is emerging, that it is not competition but rather replacement, that governs evolution.
Replacement by an even more fit, more robust alternative, a bifurcation in the evolutionary tree that grows by itself for itself, being more securely adapted to, to its surrounding conditions. To my mind even independently, to other pre-existing or even newly emerging elements, sprouting in concurrent time.
Principles that fire up in almost any activity, individuals are engaged in, the emeeeeerging collaboration trends in the world of individuals, away from soul-destroying, mind-numbing competition.
For me it makes sense, without even the need, to back it up with any hard scientific evidence. I see no need for science here. Seen science as an endeavor of our conscious mind, for a secure foothold, of what imagination and creativity has borne out, in the first place, but can not overcome its self-imposed limits. Science in itself cannot be creative.
It is not hard knowledge, evidence based, firm, solid pieces of knowledge, that matter most. You can extend, expand so much, as already pre-set boundaries, allow you. But what the goldmine is, within the science processes, what leads in leaps and bounds, are the weird and wonderful ideas created, that count.