Music Banter - View Single Post - The Myth of Objectivism
View Single Post
Old 01-29-2010, 12:03 PM   #4 (permalink)
cardboard adolescent
;)
 
cardboard adolescent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: CA
Posts: 3,503
Default

I disagree that the problematic of contemporary physics is that our metaphors break down. Rather, I think our metaphors appear as such, a particle is a wave, a thing is neither here nor there, it is everywhere and nowhere. The goal of physics is to reduce the complex singularity of an event to a network of simple, basic events arranged and multiplying in such a way as to generate complexity. With quantum mechanics, we both achieve this goal and realize its impossibility--the complexity and ambiguity of any situation (which is usually constituted around some sort of tension or contradiction) can not be reduced, it is still present on the most basic level. How does one particle turn into another, or how does one particle communicate with another and thereby change it? We have to assume some neutral substratum (energy) which, although it isn't actually present, is staying the same.

This also means, however, that the tension which keeps one situation from being another is the same tension which keeps a situation from resolving itself, and hence all situations, in keeping with metaphor, have been shown to be the same, by virtue of their difference. To put it in different terms, the question "How does particle a turn into particle b" is the same question as "How does situation a turn into situation b"? Causality approaches the problem from the outside: "it does, therefore it had to." The difficult thing is to approach the problem from the inside: "how did my past self turn into my present self? How will my present self turn into my future self?" Is this really happening, or is it a narrative we impose on a neutral substratum that doesn't actually change?

The fact that we can not go beyond metaphors such as "carrying" a signal should not suggest that we are ultimately incapable of understanding physical reality except to the extent in which it relates to us, but that we can ultimately not go beyond the experience of "carrying," because there is nowhere beyond our experiences to go to. It is not that we can only perceive reality as it relates to us, because in turn our perception of "self" is just a mode of relating to this very reality. So ultimately, we do not experience the universe as related to ourselves, since this implies that our experience of self is more objective than our experience of the universe, what we actually experience is our relation to the universe, which is objectively true, because we are experiencing it, but also subjective, because it is prone to change. And it should change, which is the ultimate goal of philosophy, because as we change our conception of physical reality we also change our conception of self, and ultimately the boundary between the one and the other become uncertain, which is really the most interesting area philosophy can lead us into.

Also, I am currently going through the experience of being "entangled" with another person, our moods always seem to be the inverse of one another, my perception of our situation is the inverse of his, and we both seem to be seduced by the possibility while at the same time resisting annihilating one another. So, if quantum mechanics can't provide a satisfying explanation of the world, it is only because we are resisting experiencing the metaphors it offers. And they are plentiful: the fact that a quark exists in a superposition of states before we measure it corresponds to the ambiguity of our own internal states until we try to investigate ourselves or interact with others. The particle/wave duality corresponds not only to other scientific dualities, like space/time or even on a meta level quantum mechanics/general relativity, but also the duality we experience within ourselves, in our relations to others, etc. etc. The skeptical response to objectivism is to say that science offers a certain kind of truth, but not objective truth. I would rather force objectivism further within itself--yes science gives us "objective" truths, but they are objective precisely because they are metaphorical (relative).

Last edited by cardboard adolescent; 01-29-2010 at 12:09 PM.
cardboard adolescent is offline   Reply With Quote