Dynamic insensitivity of the natural sciences

Sensing Epiterrestrial Intelligence (SETI) (Part #6)

---

[Parts: First | Prev | Next | Last | All] [Links: To-K | From-K | From-Kx | Refs ]

---

Is it possible that, through the focus on well-bounded categories, that the sciences are relatively insensitive to relational dynamics -- whether between those categories or otherwise?

Collections: Concrete illustrations are provided by the manner in which categories are exemplified through the specimens collected and displayed in museums, zoos and botanical gardens:

• insects pinned and labelled in trays of related species (notably butterflies, beetles, etc)
• plant flowers and leaves illustrated or "pressed" in books of related species
• animal species in cages (perhaps arrayed in "houses" with related species) in zoos
• gemstones and other mineral specimens displayed and labelled in trays
• masks, tools and ritual regalia of indigenous tribes arrayed in "rooms"
• displays of animals, "mounted" or otherwise preserved (even including human bones)
• collections of star photographs in star catalogues.

Missing dynamics: Such collections may be supplemented by textual descriptions of dynamics. The displays may be augmented by illustrations indicating some relationships. Missing, however, is any focus on the dynamics characteristic of any one species:

• characteristic movements of an individual (gait, etc)
• movement of one individual in relation to another of the same species (courtship rituals, rivalry, etc)
• movement of one species as predator or prey in relation to another
• collective movement of individuals of the same species (bird flocking, fish shoals, mammalian herds, migration, etc)
• characteristic sounds (animal calls, bird song, etc)

There may indeed be video (or audio) displays available with regard to some of these dynamics for some species. Missing however is any preoccupation with the dynamics within which each species is embedded -- perhaps understood as a "dynascape" or a soundscape.

Modelling: Presumably such movement lends itself to mathematical modelling of some kind -- as is suggested by recent videos simulating the movement of prehistoric animals, or a degree of modelling of bird flocking. There would however seem to be no effort to explore mathematically the complete range of movements -- exemplifying an extensive spectrum of functions. Dynamics are typically inferred, if at all.

The argument can be more provocatively illustrated by the apparent lack of mathematical modelling of human dynamics -- movements of portions of the body -- specifically to elicit insight into those "functions" characteristic of visual attraction, as separately discussed (Reframing the Dynamics of Engaging with Otherness: triadic correspondences between Topology, Kama Sutra and I Ching, 2011)

Ecosystem dynamics: A form of "conceptual gerrymandering" is further exemplified by the manner in which biology searches for species unknown to science, thereafter named and preserved in isolation from the ecosystemic dynamics within which they were embedded when alive. A similar process is evident in the case of anthropology where artefacts are sought, even if graves held sacred must be robbed. The challenge of recording and engaging with ritual dynamics is evident, however much use is made of appropriate equipment. The meaning held by that ritual for the peoples in question is essentially elusive. This omission contrasts with ambitious efforts to mine social networking data in order to develop global simulations (FuturICT Living Earth Platform; Synthetic Environment for Analysis and Simulations, Sentient World Simulation).

Property ownership: The issue is even more dramatically illustrated by the wide variation in the sense of "territory" and "property", and of how it is believed to be "owned" and "defended" -- "legitimately". Examples include:

• the original "sale" of Manhattan by American Indians for a collection of trinkets
• the inferrence that Aborigines did not "own" land in Australia or consider it their "property" (according to the controversial western legal principle of terra nullius)
• the acquisitive preoccupation of museums in building their collections, and the ownership claimed for its constituents (most controversially including bones acquired from graves of indigenous tribes, ritual objects, or artefacts acquired through plunder, like the Parthenon Marbles)
• intense preoccupation with intellectual property by which categories or their descriptions may be defined (Einstein's Implicit Theory of Relativity - of Cognitive Property? Unexamined influence of patenting procedures, 2007)
• the challenge to conventional boundaries, as notably enshrined in concrete, is evident in the degree to which they are now covered with graffiti

Especially interesting is the competitive process of "naming" -- notably with respect to theories, species, stars, or topological features (irrespective of their prior designations in other languages). This recalls the process of psychosocial appropriation of a space at the collective level described by the process of land nam, coined by Ananda Coomaraswamy (The Rg Veda as Land-Nama Book, 1935), to refer to the Icelandic tradition of claiming ownership of uninhabited spaces through weaving together a metaphor of geography of place into a unique mythic story. This territorial appropriation process, notably practiced by the Navaho and the Vedic Aryans, was further described by Joseph Campbell (The Inner Reaches of Outer Space: metaphor as myth and religion, 2002), as discussed separately (Identity, Possessive World-making and their Transformation Dynamics, 2012)

The "translation" of such processes into rights regarding the property so distinguished severely inhibits consideration of relevant dynamics between what is possessively distinguished in this way -- as is only too evident in the case of emerging conflicts with regard to water rights. The cognitive implications are potentially of greater concern.

There is of course the curious possibility that "epiterrestrials" may have their own understanding of "property" and may indeed frame the whole of Terra through some analogue to terra nullius -- with humans perceived as having failed appropriately to register title of "ownershp", as was declared to be the case in Australia. Sensitive epiterrestrials may well be guided by human sensitivities in the matter, as speculatively explored (Writing Guidelines for Future Occupation of Earth by Extraterrestrials: Be done by as you did ? 2010).

"Cognitive taxidermy": Provocatively it might be asked whether the constituents of the body of knowledge, variously assembled, are effectively "mounted" in a manner curiously reminiscent of the mounting of specimens in a museum. "Cognitive taxidermy" implicit in taxonomy? There is little sense of the dynamic relationships between concepts, or interest therein -- thereby underpinning and reinforcing the difficulties of interdisciplinary, international and interfaith relationships.

It is from such a perspective that the claimed willingness of a spectrum of religious adherents to "welcome" extraterrestrials should be considered with the greatest of caution (Ted Peters and Julie Froehlig, The Peters ETI Religious Crisis Survey, 2008; Jeff Levin, Revisiting the Alexander UFO Religious Crisis Survey (AUFORCS): Is There Really a Crisis? Journal of Scientific Exploration, 2012). The ongoing bloody strife between religions (Christianity/Islam, Judaism/Islam) and within them (Catholic/Evangelical, Shia/Sunni), and the long-term inability of the Abrahamic religions to address such issues with any efficacy, all suggest that the optimistic survey results hide fundamental dogmatic realities likely to render problematic any relationship with extraterrestrials -- especially if they advocate some other mode of belief, or a divinity named Otherwise.

With respect to engaging with "epiterrestrials". it would seem that neither the sciences nor the religions -- whether separately or in collaboration -- have addressed the issues which fragment their disciplines, as separately argued (Knowledge Processes Neglected by Science: insights from the crisis of science and belief, 2012; Mathematical Theology: Future Science of Confidence in Belief, 2011).

---

[Parts: First | Prev | Next | Last | All] [Links: To-K | From-K | From-Kx | Refs ]