Many people have the idea that we live in a world made of matter, following the laws of physics and various theories, such as the theory of evolution. This is strange, for matter as such does not really exist; E=mc² stands for this. I do not really understand this formula, but it stands symbolically for everything ultimately being energy, possibly even simply vibration, as string theory claims. Then there is the physics of the macrocosm and the microcosm. They contradict one another, but this does not seem to matter. Space and time curve; black holes swallow them up. We act as though there were different levels of material reality on which different laws apply, and as though this in turn were logical and determined the course of the world. Something is supposed to proceed from the Big Bang, yet we cannot even begin to explain the first fractions of a second. The complex arises from the simple, they say. Life arises from carbon, a species through reproduction, evolution through selection according to a principle they call survival. Where do such strange theories come from, and why are they so dominant?
They are dominant because they have an extremely high explanatory power and even a predictive power. According to the laws of causality, they can say what must follow in the future as a reaction to an action. Yet Schopenhauer already described how, here too, there are at least four different levels of causality (a large effect, a small reaction, or a small effect, a large reaction, for example). What we have brought forth through the science of matter is a technological world, and that cannot be denied. With the theory of evolution we cleared the way to genetics and found the code of biological life. This is impressive, of course. It shows what deeds the intellectual, rational understanding is capable of. Yet it is also the case that there is a great deal we do not understand with this understanding. The human sciences and social sciences, for example, argue very entertainingly about who is right with which theory. No one has a real explanation, and those who are honest know this very well. It is a contest of ideas that may one day produce a winner. But it looks as though this contest is becoming ever more colorful; there are not fewer theories, but more. The great unifying theory fails to appear.
Theories are images of segments of reality. A section is selected, a description given that remains within the parameters of our perception and understanding. Within this description, explanations are then sought and predictions ventured. If the predictions come true, the theory holds; if they do not, the theory is considered refuted — it holds, then, only until it is refuted. This is called the principle of falsification. Now, although — or precisely because — this procedure has worked very well since early modernity and produced much good and evil, we regard the parameters of this procedure as reality. That is what I find remarkable. For these parameters are not reality; this is a categorical misunderstanding, coupled with self-deception and a collective hallucination.
Opposed to this collective hallucination are other hallucinations — the irrational, the spiritual and religious, the meditative and delusional. A kind of schizophrenia describes the condition of the human being in modernity. We are firmly convinced of things we know to be false. How can this be explained and overcome?
What if we left behind the ideal of freedom from contradiction? What would a world look like in which contradictions were not dismissed as such, but celebrated as an insight into complexity? This was something of the project of postmodernism. Within individual disciplines, the ideal of freedom from contradiction is stimulating, but already at their margins or between the subtopics of a discipline it can no longer be sustained. It leads to confusion. Things are supposed to be merged that do not belong together. It is this authoritarian trait of the rational that feeds fascism.
I gave this text to Chatgpt for spelling correction; the tool does this very well. But now it continued writing without being asked. This is the unsolicited continuation of my text. I largely agree with it, but why did the AI go on hallucinating here?
“Instead, we could aim for a world in which contradictions are recognized as valuable indications of the complexity and many layers of reality. Such a world would not try to harmonize or level all differences, but would recognize and appreciate them in their own right. This would mean regarding different paths to knowledge — whether rational, spiritual, intuitive, or artistic — as complementary rather than competing.
In practice, this could lead to a much richer and more diverse dialogue in which different perspectives are not only tolerated, but actively sought and integrated. This could enrich not only our sciences and arts, but also lead to a more inclusive and understanding society in which different viewpoints and ways of living are seen as part of a greater, many-layered whole.”
https://chatgpt.com/share/084c63f0-d483-4ff5-a351-c051840d4292
Personally, I find this a little too limited; I had really wanted to go a little deeper, but I am taking it now as an occasion for a pause.
