The Scientific Method          

Home Feedback Contents Search

 

 

 

 

 

A DIFFERENT VERSION of SCIENTIFIC METHOD WITH SPANISH TEXT

BELIEF as necessary part of Innovaton  As part of Religion  Un-provable Assumptions

THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD: Cannons of inquiry Descarte (1596-1650 AD)

A) OBSERVATION: We start with observation, (not reason), Measurement, hopefully with as much precision as possible. We also should try to state the probable error in our observations so as to know just how precise - or imprecise- they probably are.  This is the key part which was introduced first Roger Bacon (1214-1294), "Reasoning does NOT suffice, experience does." then by Galileo Galilei (1564-1624) to modify or reject the philosophy of St. Augustine (345-430 AD) reject introspection method dominated by rejection of external Reality, Scholasticism.

B) RATIONALIZATION: SECOND Reason, Thinking about the observed data.

   1) Assumptions: We should try to state all  assumptions; this involves the acceptance of certain premises as true without further consideration as to their validity. Particularly hidden or unstated assumptions built into prior concepts can be dangerous if we do not know we are making them. Pythagoras (ca 582-530 BC) and Euclid (330-260 BC) introduced this.

   2) ABSTRACTION:  This is the process of selection of what we think are the pertinent facts from the data, and discarding presumably irrelevant data and un-needed observations. Note that the process of abstraction can create errors by discarding really relevant facts J.S. Mill (1806-1873)

   3) SELECTION of DESCRIPTIONS Selection of variables, including the terms in mathematics (Physics), Anaxagoras (488-428 BC) and Pythagoras (ca 582-530 BC) followed by Plato(427-347 BC), Kant ca 1800 is included here, irrelevance steps in at this point to help eliminate bad choices.

   4) INDUCTION Inductive method Aristotle (384-322 BC) (Going from the particular to the general), Later Francis Bacon (1561-1626) tried to replace strictly deductive logic with induction:: Formation of the:

     Hypothesis {ascending ladder of induction introduced by Plato (427-347 BC}                      (= little testing- tentative, lots of skepticism)

      Theory, (= more testing, more reliable)   

       Law (= lots of testing, reliable, little skepticism).

     In other words we form a simplified MENTAL PICTURE of how we think nature operates. A theory is the same, or perhaps a slightly modified mental construct as a hypothesis but with more testing, and more confidence. A Law has extensive testing, and an even higher confidence level but all are just mental pictures of reality / observation.

   5) DEDUCTION  (Logic formalized by Aristotle, & Euclid ca 330-260 BC, G.Boole(1815-1864) The nature of proof and syllogism, From the mental concept we predict what we think will happen in future events. We form mental pictures which we hope will match reality. Thus we do not have to actually do all actions to know what probably will happen. We can think and deduce events instead of trying all options. Immanuel Kant laws of logic & things (1724-1804)

A) repeat  EXPERIMENTATION: (Controlled Observation) This is controlled deliberate action to make new predicted observations, under controlled conditions, (Strato 288 BC) this is a loop to top step A again.

C) JUDGEMENT: (Socratic inquiry 470-399 BC) From the predictions it is possible to apply value judgments to the possible events, to elect those we desire, and to avoid those we think we will not like. Thus the scientific method allows us to select action choices which match our ethical values.

     WE SHOULD NEVER EVER use judgment to direct the formation of inductions, only observations. Using judgments results in wishful interpretations of reality, not based upon observation. This backwards step has perhaps caused more human misery than anything else I can name.

D) CONTRADICTION If there is a contradiction between what we predicted (rationalized) and what we observe, then the error was in the mental process; nature, reality is never wrong.

E) William of OCCAM'S(1284-1349)Principle("RAZOR")(SIMPLEST HYPOTHESIS) Parsimony-Given two hypotheses, reject the more complicated & accept the simplest hypothesis. Nature operates simply; excessive complexity is usually a hint that our mental construct is partially wrong (and thus just plain wrong) ("It is vain to do with more when we could do with less").

F) OCCAM'S COROLLARY (COMPLETENESS) Reject any hypothesis that is not complete and does not explain all the data.

G) INTERDEPENDENCE The experimentalist reacts with the experiment. This must be accounted for - one must take into account one's own existence as part of the universe. The Double Blind method is one way to reduce this,& it must not be ignored. (Hippocrates ca 460 BC, Imotep ca 2850 BC)

H) HISTORY  The record of past events (experimental observations, data), and past rationalization, (the mental constructs, the hypotheses, laws and theories), is a foundation for science. We use past records and build upon them to avoid having to re-do every single experiment for every student. The students need to re-do enough of the experiments and deductive chains so that they feel confident even in the ones that they did not repeat. That also gives credibility to the mental picture of reality and the thought processes we have built up.

I) ANTI AUTHORITARIANISM  Francis Bacon (1561-1603) following Dr Gilbert (1540-1603) and John Napier (1550-1617) "Authority" many never be cited as an argument for or against any hypothesis. Theory may not be used to refute theory. Only the facts, observations, may be used to judge the success or failure of any theory. An individual who relies on "authority" is dealing with politics, not science, and credibility of people has little place in considering theories with any true scientist. Any person who stoops to the level of personalities & authoritarianism is not a true scientist. The scientist considers reality, data and observations, not personality. Credibility implies a court /truth question, & the scientist will just repeat the experiment if there is doubt to thus resolve the problem.

J) REPRODUCIBILITY (CAUSE -EFFECT) It is assumed that experiments can be repeated, and if the same conditions are established the same results will happen. There is a "cause-effect" relationship in conditions and results. Note determination and separation of the cause and effect from other symptoms may not be easy, and an apparent cause-effect may actually both be effects from another prior more fundamental cause, or all may just be joint co-symptoms of other unobserved causative effects J. J. Mills and David Hume (1711-1776)

K VARIABILITY  (Heraclitus 540-475 BC Everything is in a state of change, in flux) History also consists of irreproducible results, unique situations which can never be closely approximated again. In fact all experiments are slightly different, we never exactly reproduce the same conditions in any two experiments. {DARIUS ca 320 BC: You can never step twice in the same stream}. Thus the key to science it to get conditions close enough so that the variations do not change the outcome. This is also tied with the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle (HUP) (W. Heisenberg 1901-1976) particularly on the microscopic level; Plack, Einstein, etc.

L) IRRELEVANCE (1969) Every variable or concept has a domain over which it is valid. Outside that domain the variables or concepts become irrelevant and other variables or concepts must be used to describe phenomena, to describe events, JHL Lawler (1936-_).ctd.
 

M COROLLARY we should try to describe the domain over which concepts and variables operate, and to specify the limits to be certain we do not use those concepts or variables where they do not apply, where they are irrelevant. As a hint the quantum, the smallest unit of any concept usually marks the boundary of a domain.

This determines domains of usefulness, which variables, and which concepts should be used and which are not usable. It also suggests we may be trying to use concepts where they really are not relevant. We need to examine our operations with some care looking for possible errors in our assumptions, particularly where we have allowed JUDGEMENT to go backwards into creating wishful theory.

 

     Let us try to demonstrate this concept. The concept of a living "creature" or of "animal" or "plant" in the domain of size is valid from perhaps a few meters, 30 m for trees and whales, or so maximum, down to about 10-6 meters. It has a fundamental least unit, a "quantum" of one cell. We may have one-celled living things, but below that one cell we have fragments of a cell, which are not living by themselves. The size in the domain of a typical cell is about 1 micron, a millionth of a meter. Some are much larger, in fact in an orange we may even see one cell, but in most animals and plants a micron is a typical size. One may argue about whether a virus is living or not, but that seems to be the lower limit in this domain.

     Next consider the concept of molecule. The molecule is the smallest unit or quantum of a compound. Typical molecules such as water or CO2  are an angstroms in size, 1 to 3 x 10-10  meters. We may meaningfully ask how many molecules of any compound are in a cell, but we may not meaningfully ask how many cells are in a molecule. The size domain of cell became irrelevant about 10,000 times larger than size of a molecule. Atoms are the quantum or smallest units of elements & Atoms make up molecules, and their domain is somewhat smaller than molecule. We may inquire with meaning how many atoms make up a molecule, but the reverse - how many molecules make up a atom is irrelevant nonsense.

Neutrons and protons are smaller still, the quanta of the nucleus of the atom, with the neutron or proton being a bit less than one Fermi in size i.e. a bit less than 10-15 meters. Saying how many protons or neutrons are in the nucleus of an atom is meaningful, but how many atoms are in a proton is irrelevant and meaningless.

     Thus as the size decreases, more & more concepts become irrelevant, and nature must be described with different concepts. This applies to larger domains also since we usually would not describe cellular biochemical reactions, of even chemistry in terms of nuclear proton and neutron interactions.

     As a note Energy is quantized, and the quantum of energy is the photon, thus marking the probable end of the domain of energy.  All quantum mechanics is based historically and fundamentally on electromagnetic, photon, type equations and interactions. Applying Einstein's famous mC2 = E; or in words mass and Energy are inter-convertible, we may conclude with rigorous symbolic logic that mass is quantized, and that the quantum of mass is the photon. This results experimentally in the observed Compton wavelength and the Compton equation.

==================================================================

A DIFFERENT VERSION of SCIENTIFIC METHOD WITH SPANISH TEXT

THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD: The Scientific method is a changing series of principles which have been discovered over a long period of time and which, when followed, produce new observations and new thoughts. In terms of motivation, a Scientist is deliberately setting out to seek something new. He is curious. That is the whole purpose of science. As a side result he almost certainly will create new technology and new products and things of value, but those are simply by products of science. The pure scientist is trying to describe the universe in as simple terms as possible, to obtain as accurate a mental picture of reality as possible. The Method has been repeatedly modified, and I would hope and expect that further changes will also occur. It is almost certainly NOT now complete. It, or parts of it, have been stated and then modified or restated many times.  Unfortunately most so called scientists and people working in scientific disciplines have not ever been exposed to this method. All too many people lack knowledge of the very foundation of science. This is an attempt to correct this problem, and to give a tool to anyone in a scientific discipline. Notes of people who contributed (with their birth and death dates) are includes with each principle. A major summary for example was done in "Decourse of Methods" (1637), and "Cannons of Inquiry" Descartes (1596-1650 AD).

 

El método científico es una serie de principios cambiantes, que ha sido descubierto desde hace un largo período de tiempo; el cual cuando es seguido produce nuevas observacines e ideas. En términos de motivación, el científico es alguien que deliberadamente trata de desarrollar algo nuevo. Encontrar algo nuevo, es la motivación de la ciencia. Eso es el propósito de la ciencia. Como  resultado secundario el científico ciertamente va a crear nuevas tecnologías, nuevos productos, y cosas de valor; pero éstos son simplemente productos intermedios de la ciencia. El científico puro trata de decribir el universo en términos más símples posibles para obtener una figura mental tan exacta como sea posible de la realidad.

 

El método científico ha sido repetidamente modificado y se expecta y espera que suceda más cambios en el futuro. Actualmente no es ciertamente completo. El método o parte de él ha sido expresado, modificado o re-expresado muchas veces. Notas de gente que ha contribuido (Nacimiento y muerte) esta incluído en cada principio. Un resúmen mayor fué por ejemplo hecho por Descartes (1596-1650) en "Discours de la Méthode" en 1637 DC y "Cannones de Inquiry".

 

 

BELIEF:  (See final pages), Belief must be added to the Scientific Method as it constrains what we will seek. At this point I must mention the Skeptical school of Greece, founded by Pyrrhon of Elis (365-275 BC), and later "perfected" by Sextus Empiricus (160-210 AD) (Empirical methods!) which allows no "hidden causes", rejects transcendentalism and allows only direct observational results. We must use Cynicism (Antisthenes ca 400 BC) and Skepticism to prevent arbitrary and unfounded belief from constraining our field of investigation. We must recognize and reject the incipient control of unfounded beliefs & open our minds to explore ALL possibilities. While we have not observed all things, anything which can never be observed is not subject to Scientific Method. It is based on that which we can observe, defined as "reality". Transcendentalism, all "hidden causes" and mysticism are rejected to the extent that they can never be observed.

CREENCIA: (ver paginas finales). La creencia debe ser incluido en el metodo cientifico, porque nos limita a lo que estamos buscando o tratando de lograr. En este punto debo mencional la escuela de Escepticos en Grecia fundado por Pyrrhon of Elis (365-275 AC), y luego "perfeccionado" por Sextus Empiricus (160-210 DC) (Metodo Empirico!), el cual no permite "causas escondidas", repudia el trascendentalismo y permite solamente resultados observados directamente. Debemos usar el cinismo- Antisthenes aprox. 400 AC) y Escepticismo para prevenir creencias arbitrarias e infundadas de restriccion en el campo de nuestra investigacion. Debemos reconocer y repudiar el control incipiente de infundadas creencias y abrir nuestras mentes para explorar toda las posibilidades.  Mientras que no hemos observado toda las cosas posibles, cualquier cosa que puede ser observado es governado por el metodo cientifico. Cualquier cosa que no puede ser observado no es governado por el metodo cientifico. El metodo Cientifico esta solamente basado en las cosas en que podemos observar y es definido como una realidad. Trascendentalismo, toda las "causas escondidas" y el misticismo son repudiados al punto que nunca pueden ser observados.

 

A) OBSERVATION: We start with observation, experience, not reason. We collect data, do measurement, hopefully with as much precision as needed or possible. We also should try to state the probable error in our data, our observations so as to know just how precise - or imprecise- they probably are.  This is the key part was reintroduced first Roger Bacon (1214-1294), "Reasoning does NOT suffice, experience does." then by Galileo Galilei (1564-1624) rejecting Scholasticism and to modifying or rejecting the philosophy of St. Augustine (345-430 AD) rejecting his introspective method dominated by ignoring external Reality in favor of transcendentalism.

 

A) OBSERVACION: Empezamos con la observacion, la experiencia, no la razon. Coleccionamos datos, hacemos mediciones, esperando que sean los mas presiscios posibles como sea necesario. Tambien debemos tratar de enunciar los errores posibles en los datos, en nuestras observaciones, entoces podemos saber cuan precisos o imprecisos son. Esta parte clave fue reintroducido por Roger Bacon (1214-1294), " El Razonamiento no es suficiente, la experiencia sí". Luego por Galileo Galilei (1564-1624) repudiando el Scolasticismo y para modificar o repudiar la filosofia de  San Agustin (345-430 DC) repudiando su metodo introspectivo ignorando la realidad externa en favor del trascendentalismo.

 

B) RATIONALIZATION:: SECOND; Thinking about the observed data.

   1) Assumptions: We should try to state all  assumptions; this involves the acceptance of certain premises as true without further consideration as to their validity. Particularly hidden or unstated assumptions built into prior concepts can be dangerous if we do not know we are making them.

 

B) RACIONALIZACION:: (SEGUNDO) Pensando sobre los datos observados.

     1) Suposicion: Debemos tratar de enunciar toda las suposiciones; esto envuelve la aseptancia de ciertas premisas como verdaderos sin consideracion futura de su validez. Particularmete las suposiciones escondidas o las no enunciadas, constituidos en comceptos preliminares pueden ser peligrosos si no sabemos que existen. Introducido por Pythagoras (aprox. 582-530 AC) y Euclides (330-260 AC).

 

   2) ABSTRACTION:  This is the process of selection of what we think are the pertinent facts from the data, and discarding presumably irrelevant data and un-needed observations. Note that the process of abstraction can create errors by discarding really relevant facts J.S. Mill (1806-1873)

 

     2) ABSTRACCION: Esto es el proceso de seleccion de lo que pensamos que son los hechos pertinetes de los datos, y descartando los datos presumiblemente irrelevantes y observaciones innecesarias. Notar que el proceso de abstraccion puede crear errores por descarte de los hechos realmente relevantes J.S Mill (1806-1873)

 

   3) SELECTION OF DESCRIPTIONS Selection of variables, including the terms in mathematics (Physics), Anaxagoras (488-428 BC) and Pythagoras (ca 582-530 BC) followed by Plato(427-347 BC), Kant ca 1800 is included here, irrelevance steps in at this point to help eliminate bad choices.

 

     3) SELECCION DE DESCRIPCIONES Seleccion de variables, incluyendo los terminos en matematicas (fisica), Anaxagoras (488-428 AC) y Pitagoras (Aprox. 582-530 AC) seguido pr Platon (427-347 AC), Kant Aprox. 1800 esta incluido aqui, irrelevancia funciona en este punto para ayudar a eliminar elecciones erroneas.

 

   4) INDUCTION Inductive method Aristotle (384-322 BC) (Going from the particular to the general), Later Francis Bacon (1561-1626) tried to replace what had degenerated to strictly deductive logic with induction:: Formation of the:

          1)Hypothesis (ascending ladder of induction introduced by Plato

          (427-347 BC)(= little testing- tentative, lots of skepticism)

          2)Theory, (= more testing, more reliable)     

          3)Law (= lots of testing, reliable, little skepticism).

     In other words we form a simplified MENTAL PICTURE of how we think nature operates. A theory is the same, or perhaps a slightly modified mental construct as a hypothesis but with more testing, and more confidence. A Law has extensive testing, and an even higher confidence level but all are just mental pictures of reality / observation.

 

     4) INDUCCION Metodo inductivo- Aristoteles (384-322 AC) (yendo de lo particular a lo general), luego Francis Bacon (1561-1626) reintrodujo la induccion porque la gente degeneró solo para usar la logica deductiva olvidando la induccion::

Formacion de la:

          1) Hipotesis (escalera ascendente de induccion introducido por         Platon (427-347 AC) (= tests pequeños- tentativos, bastante      escepticismo)

          2) Teoria, (= mas test, mas confiable)

          3) Ley (= bastante tests, confiable, poco escepticismo).    

     En otras palabras nos formamos una FIGURA MENTAL simplificada, de lo que pensamos cómo opera la naturaleza. Una teoria es lo mismo, o quizas un figura mental ligeramente modificada como una hipotesis pero con mayor test, y mayor confianza. Una ley tiene un test extensivo, e incluso mayor nivel de confianza pero todos son solo figuras mentales en realidad/ observacion.

 

   5) DEDUCTION  (Logic formalized by Aristotle, & Euclid ca 330-260 BC, The nature of proof and syllogism. Propositional logic developed by Chrysippus, third head of Stoic school, questionably superior to Aristotelian logic, both later developed by George Boole (Boolean Algebra) (1815-1864) Gottlog Frege (1848-1925), C.L.Dodgson(1832-1898), Bertrand Russell and A.N.Whitehead (Principia Mathematica in 1910). From the mental concept we predict what we think will happen in future events. We form mental pictures which we hope will match reality. Thus we do not have to actually do all actions to know what probably will happen. We can think and predict what will happen instead of experimentally trying all options. Immanuel Kant "Laws of Logic & Things" (1724-1804),

 

     5) DEDUCCION {Logica formalizada por Aristoteles y Euclides Aprox. 330-260 AC, "La Naturaleza de Prueba y Silogismo". Logica proposicional desarrollado por Crisipus, tercera cabeza de la escuela Estoica, cuestionablemente superior a la logica Aristoteliana, ambos desarrollados posteriormente por Geoge Boole (Algebra Booleana) (1815-1864) Gottlog Frege (1848-1925), C.L. Dodgson (1832-1898), Bertrand Rusell y A.N Whitehead (Principio Matematico en 1910)}. Del concepto mental que predecimos de lo que va a pasar en futuros eventos, nos formamos una figura mental el cual esperamos va a ser compatible con la realidad. Por lo que no necesariamente tenemos que hacer todas las acciones para saber que va a pasar probablemente. Podemos pensar y predecir lo que va a pasar en lugar de tratar de experimentar toda las opciones. "La Ley de Logica y Cosas" de Inmanuel Kant (1724-1804).

 

 

A)(repeated) EXPERIMENTATION: (Controlled Observation) This is controlled deliberate action to make new predicted observations, under controlled conditions,(Strato 288 BC) this is a loop to top step A again.

 

A) (repetido) EXPERIMENTACION: (OBSERVACION CONTROLADA) Esto es una accion deliberada y controlada para hacer observaciones predecidas nuevas, bajo condiciones controladas, (Strato 288 AC) Vuelve al paso A otra vez.

 

C) PREDICTIONS: JUDGEMENT: (Socratic inquiry 470-399 BC) From the predictions it is possible to apply value judgements to the possible events, to elect those we desire, and to avoid those we think we will not like. Thus the scientific method allows us to select action choices which match our ethical values. At this point Ethics enters into Science.

     WE SHOULD NEVER EVER use judgement to direct the formation of inductions, only observations. Using judgements results in wishful interpretations of reality, not based upon observation. This backwards step has perhaps caused more human misery than anything else I can name.

 

C) PREDICCIONES: JUICIO DE VALOR: (Indagación Socrática 470-399 AC)

A partir de las predicciones es posible aplicar juicio valedero para los posibles eventos, para elegir aquello que deseamos, y evitar aquellos que pensamos no nos va a gustar. Asi el Metodo cientifico nos permite seleccionar acciones que van con la etica de valores. An este punto la etica entra dentro de la ciencia.

     NO DEBEMOS NUNCA usar el juicio para dirigir la formacion de inducciones, solo observaciones. Usar el juicio solo resulta en iluciones de interpretacion de la realidad, no basados mas alla de la observacion. Este paso de retroceso ha causado quizas mas miseria humana que cualquier otra cosa que yo pueda nombrar.

 

D) CONTRADICTION If there is a contradiction between what we predicted (rationalized) and what we observe, then the error was in the mental

 

process; nature, reality is never wrong. Our mental process may be.

 

D) CONTRADICCION Si existe contradiccion entre lo que predecimos (racionalizado) y lo que observamos, entonces el error estuvo en el proceso mental; la naturaleza, la realidad no es nunca erroneo. Nuestro proceso mental si puede estarlo.

 

E) William of OCCAM'S(1284-1349)Principle("RAZOR")(SIMPLEST HYPOTHESIS) Parsimony-Given two hypotheses, reject the more complicated & accept the simplest hypothesis. Nature operates simply; excessive complexity is usually a key that our mental construct is partially wrong (and thus just plain wrong) ("It is vain to do with more when we could do with less").

 

E) PRINCIPIO DE WILLIAM OF OCCAM'S (1284-1349) ("RAZURADOR") (La Hipotesis mas simple). Parsimonia- Dada dos hipotesis, rechaza el mas complicado y acepta la hipotesis mas simple. La naturaleza opera simple; la complejidad exesiva es usualmente la clave que nuestra interpretacion mental es parcialmente errado (y asi simplemente erroneo) ("Es envano hacer con mas cuando podemos hacer con menos")

 

F) OCCAM'S COROLLARY (COMPLETENESS) Reject any hypothesis that is not complete and does NOT explain all the data.

F) COROLARIO DE OCCAM  (COMPLESION) Rechaza cualquier hipotesis que no es completo y que no explica todo los datos.

 

G) INTERDEPENDENCE The experimentalist reacts with the experiment. This must be accounted for - one must take into account one's own existence as part of the universe. The Double Blind method is one way to reduce this, and it must not be ignored. (Hippocrates ca 460 BC and Imotep ca 2850 BC)

G) INTERDEPENDENCIA El interdependentalista reacciona con el experimento. Esto debe ser contado por - Uno debe toma en cuenta su propia existencia como parte del universo. El metodo doblemente ciego es una forma de reducir esto, y eso no debe ser ignorado. (Hipocrates aprox. 460 AC e Imotep Aprox. 2850 A.C.)

 

H) HISTORY  The record of past events (experimental observations, data), and past rationalization, (the mental constructs, the hypotheses, laws and theories), is a foundation for science. We use past records and build upon them to avoid having to re-do every single experiment for every student. The students need to re-do enough of the experiments that they feel confident even in the ones that they did not repeat. That also gives credibility to the mental picture of reality and the thought processes we have built up.

H) HISTORIA  El registro de eventos pasados (observaciones experimentales, datos), y racionalizaciones pasadas,(la interpretacion mental, la hipotesis, leyes y teorias), es la fundacion de la ciencia. Nosotros usamos registros pasados y construimos sobre ello para evitar re- hacer cada experimento simple por cada estudiante. El estudiante necesita re-hacer suficiente de cada experimento para que se sienta confiado incluso en las cosas que no se han repetido. Eso tambien da credibilidad a la figura mental de la realidad y el proceso mental que hemos construido.

 

 

 

I) ANTI AUTHORITARIANISM  Francis Bacon (1561-1603) following Dr Gilbert (1540-1603) and John Napier (1550-1617) "Authority" many never be cited as an argument for or against any hypothesis. Theory may not be used to refute theory. Only the facts, observations, may be used to judge the success or failure of any theory. An individual who relies on "authority" is dealing with politics, not science, and credibility has little place in considering theories with any true scientist. Any person who stoops to the level of personalities & authoritarianism is not a true scientist. The scientist considers reality, data and observations, not personality. Credibility implies a court /truth question, & the scientist will just repeat the experiment if there is doubt to resolve the problem.

I) ANTIAUTORITARISMO Francis Bacon (1561-1603) siguiendo Dr. Gilbert (1540-1603) y John Naiper (1550-1617) "Autoridad" muchos nunca han sido citados como un argumento para o contra cualquier hipotesis. La teoria no puede ser usado para refutar la teoria. Solo la realidad,y las observaciones puede ser usados para juzgar el fracazo o el triunfo de cualquier teoria. Un individuo que confia en una "Autoridad" esta negociando con los politicos, no la ciencia, y la credibilidad tiene pequeño lugar para considerar teorias con cualquier cientifico de verdad. Cualquier persona que se rebaja al nivel de personalidades y autorirtarismo no es un científico de verdad. El científico considera la realidad, los datos y observaciones, no la personalidad. La credibilidad implica una corte/ pregunta verdadera, y el científico simplemente va a repetir el experimento si hay duda para resolver el problema.

 

J) REPRODUCIBILITY (CAUSE -EFFECT) It is assumed that experiments can be repeated, and if the same conditions are established the same results will happen. There is a "cause-effect" relationship in conditions and results. Note determination and separation of the cause and effect from other symptoms may not be easy, and an apparent cause-effect may actually both be effects from another prior more fundamental cause, or all may just be joint co-symptoms of other unobserved causative effects J.J.Mills and David Hume (1711-1776)

J) REPRODUCTIBILIDAD (CAUSA-EFECTO)  Se asume que los experimentos pueden ser repetidos, si las mismas condiciones son establecidas va a resultar lo mismo. Hay una relacion "causa-efecto" en condiciones y resultados. Notar la determinacion y separacion de causa y efecto de otros sintomas puede no ser facil y una aparente causa-efecto puede actualmense ser ambos efecto de otra causa anterior mas fundamental, o todos pueden ser union de co-sintomas de otros efectos causativos no observados J.J Mills y David Hume (1711-1776)

 

K VARIABILITY  (Heraclitus 540-475 BC Everything is in a state of change, in flux) History also consists of irreproducible results, unique situations which can never be closely approximated again. In fact all experiments are slightly different, we never exactly reproduce the same conditions in any two experiments. {DARIUS ca 320 BC: You can never step twice in the same stream}. Thus the key to science it to get conditions close enough so that the variations do not change the outcome. This is also tied with the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle (HUP) (W. Heisenberg 1901-1976) particularly on the microscopic level; This continued with Max Planck, Albert Einstein, with quanta mechanics and relativity etc.

K) VARIABILIDAD (Heraclitos 540-475 AC. Toda las cosas estan en estado de cambio y flujo) La historis tambien consiste de resultados irreproducibles, situaciones únicas los cuales nunca pueden acercarse otra vez. En realidad todo los experimentos son ligeramente diferentes, nunca exactamente se reproduce la misma condicion en cualquiera de 2 experimentos . {Darious Aprox.320 A.C: Nunca puedes pisar 2 veces sobre el agua del mismo rio}. Por lo cual la clave de la ciencia es obtener condiciones lo mas cerca posible, asi la variacion no pueda cambiar el resultado. Esto esta tambien atado al Principio de Incertidumbre de Heisenberg (HUP) (W.Heisenberg 1901-1976) particularmente en el nivel microscopico; Esto continuó con Plank, Albert Eistein, con el quanta mecanica y relatividad etc.

 

L) IRRELEVANCE (1969) Every variable or concept has a domain over which it is valid. Outside that domain the variables or concepts become irrelevant and other variables or concepts must be used to describe phenomena, to describe events, J.H.L. Lawler (1936-_).

 

L(IRRELEVAMCIA (1969) Toda las variables y conceptos tienen un dominio sobre el cual es valido. Fuera de ese dominio las variables o conceptos llegan a ser irrelevantes y otras variables o conceptos deben ser usados para describir el fenomeno, y describir los eventos, J.H.L. Lawler

 

L COROLLARY we should try to describe the domain over which concepts and variables operate, and to specify the limits to be certain we do not use those concepts or variables where they do not apply, where they are irrelevant. As a hint the quantum, the smallest unit of any concept usually marks the boundary of a domain.

 

L COROLARIO Bebemos tratar de describir el dominio sobre el cual el concepto y variables operan, y para especificar los limites para ser certeros no usamos esos conceptos o variables en donde no se aplican, donde son irrelevantes. Como una señal el Quantum, La unidad mas pequeña de cualquier concepto usualmente marca la union de un dominio.


Irrelevance determines domains of usefulness, which variables, and which concepts should be used and which are not usable. It also suggests we may be trying to use concepts where they really are not relevant. We need to examine our operations with some care looking for possible errors in our assumptions, particularly where we have allowed JUDGEMENT to go backwards into creating wishful theory.

 

La irrelevancia determina dominio de lo inservible, que variables, y que conceptos deben ser usados y cuales no son usables. La irrelevancia tambien sugiere que quizas estamos usando conceptos donde ellos realmente no son relevantes. Necesitamos examinar nuestras operaciones con cuidado buscando por posibles errores en nuestras asunciones, particularmente donde hemos dejado que el juicio vaya de retroceso en la creacion de la teoria de ilusion.

 

     Let me try to demonstrate this concept. The concept of a living "creature" or of "animal" or "plant" in the domain of size is valid from perhaps a few meters, 30 m for trees and whales, or so maximum, down to about 10-6 meters. It has a fundamental least unit, a "quantum" of one cell. We may have one celled living things, but below that one cell we have fragments of a cell which are not living by themselves. The size in the domain of a typical cell is about 1 micron, a millionth of a meter. Some are much larger, in fact in an orange we may even see one cell, but in most animals and plants a micron is a typical size. One may argue about whether a virus is living or not, but that seems to be the lower limit in this domain.

     Permitanme tratar de demostrarles este concepto. El concepto de la criatura "viviente" o de "animal" o "planta" en el dominio del tamaño es valido desde quizas unos pocos metros, 30m para arboles y ballenas o algo asi como maximo, bajo aprox. 10-6 metros. Tiene una unidad menos fundamental, un "quantum" de una celula. Podemos tener unidades unicellar vivientes, pero debajo de esa celula tenemos fragmentos de celula, los cuales no estan viviendo por sí solos. El tamaño en el dominio de una célula típica es aprox. 1 micron, una millonesima parte de un metro. Algunos son mas grandes, en efecto en una naranja podemos incluso ver una celula, pero en la mayoria de animales y plantas el tamaño típico es 1 micron. Algunos siguen discutiendo si el virus es viviente o no, pero eso parece ser el limite menor en este dominio.

 

     Next consider the concept of molecule. The molecule is the smallest unit or quantum of a compound. Typical molecules such as water or CO2  are a few angstroms in size, 1 to 3 x 10-10  meters. We may meaningfully ask how many molecules of any compound are in a cell, but we may not meaningfully ask how many cells are in a molecule. The size domain of cell became irrelevant about 10,000 times larger than size of a molecule.

     Luego considerar el concepto de molecula. La molecula es la unidad mas pequeña o quantum de un componente. Las moleculas tipicas como el agua o el CO2 son unos pocos Angstroms en tamaño, 1 a 3 x 10-10 metros. Podemos preguntar significativamente cuantas moleculas de cualquier compuesto hay en una celula, pero no podemos preguntar significativamente cuantas celulas hay en una molecula. El dominio tamaño de una celula llega a ser irrelevante aprox. 10,000 veces mas grande que el tamaño de una molecula.

 

     Atoms are the quantum or smallest units of elements & Atoms make up molecules, and their domain is somewhat smaller than molecule. We may inquire with meaning how many atoms make up a molecule, but the reverse - how many molecules make up a atom is irrelevant nonsense.

Neutrons and protons are smaller still, the quanta of the nucleus of the atom, with the neutron or proton being a bit less than one Fermi in size i.e. a bit less than 10-15 meters. Saying how many protons or neutrons are in the nucleus of an atom is meaningful, but how many atoms are in a proton is irrelevant and meaningless.

 

     Los átomos son el quantum o las unidades mas pequeñas de los elementos y los atomos constituyen las moleculas,pero al reves- Cuantas moleculas hacen un atomo es irrelevante , no tiene sentido.

Los neutrones y protones son todavia mas pequeños, el quanta del nucleo de un atomo, con el neutron o proton siendo un poco mas pequeño que un Fermi en tamaño Ejm: un poco menos de 10-15  de un metro. Decir cuantos protones y neutrones hay en el nucleo de un atomo tiene significado, pero cuantos atomos hay en un proton es irrelevante y sin significado.

 

     Thus as the size decreases, more & more concepts become irrelevant, and nature must be described with different concepts. This applies to larger domains also since we usually would not describe cellular biochemical reactions, or even chemistry in terms of nuclear proton and neutron interactions.

 

     Entonces el tamaño decrece, mas y mas conceptos llegan a ser irrelevantes y la naturaleza debe ser descrito con conceptos diferentes. Esto tambien se aplica a dominios mas grandes ya que normalmente no describimos reacciones celulares bioquimicas, o incluso quimicas en terminos de interacciones de protones y neutrones nucleares.

 

     As a note Energy is quantized, and the quantum of energy is the photon, thus marking the probable end of the domain of energy.  All quantum mechanics is based historically and fundamentally on electromagnetic, photon, type equations and interactions. Applying Einstein's famous mC2 = E; or in words mass and Energy are inter-convertible, we may conclude with rigorous symbolic logic that mass is quantized, and that the quantum of mass is the photon. This results experimentally in the observed Compton wavelength and the Compton equation.

 

     Como nota- La la energia es quantizada, y  la quanta de energia es el foton, asi haciendo el fin probable del dominio de la energia. Todo los quantum mecanicos estan basados historicamente y fundamentalmente en electromagneticos, fotones, tipo de ecuaciones e interacciones. Aplicando la famosa formula de Eistein mC2 =E; o en palabras Masa y Energia son interconvertibles, podemos concluir con rigurosos simbolos logicos que la masa es quantizada, y el quantum de la masa es el foton. Esto resulta experimentalmente en la observacion de microhondas de Compton y la ecuacion de compton.

         

 BELIEF   CREENCIA

 

 

BELIEF, Faith, IMAGINATION as a FORCE for CHANGE, for Creativity, for EXPERIMENTATION, as part of the Scientific Method.

     Most people start out in experimentation to prove what they believe, and if they did not believe it, then they would not perform that experiment.  Thus what we believe can -WILL - constrain our outlook and what we try to accomplish. To quote Henry Ford, "Whether you believe you can or can not, you are probably right." 

 

CREENCIA, FE, IMAGINACION COMO UNA FUERZA PARA EL CAMBIO, PARA LA CREATIVIDAD, PARA LA EXPERIMENTACION, COMO PARTE DEL METODO CIENTIFICO.

 

La mayoria de la gente empieza con la experimentacion para provar que es lo que creen, y si ellos no creen eso, entonces no van a hacer el experimento. Entonces lo que creemos puede- VA - encerrar nuestro punto de vista y que es lo que tratamos de realizar. Para repetir lo que dijo Henrry Ford, "Ya se que creas que puedes o que no puedes, estas probablemente en lo cierto".

 

     Belief is neither positive nor negative. It is neutral. It can be either creative or destructive, it can encourage or inhibit. It depends on how you use it.

 

     Belief is NOT NOW included in the field of science or scientific method. I can not "observe" or measure belief. I can; however, observe or measure the effects of belief, and thus talk about it in real terms. But we have not until now applied scientific method (as now constituted) to belief,

 

     La creencia no es positivo ni negativo. Es neutral. La creencia puede ser igualmente creativo o destructivo, puede estimular o inhibir. depende como tu lo uses.

 

     La creencia NO ES ACTUALMENTE incluido en el campo de la ciencia o el metodo cientifico. La creencia no es posible observar ni medir. Como quiera que se puede observar y medir los efectos de la creencia, y asi poder hablar sobre ello en terminos reales. Pero no hemos aplicado hasta ahora el metodo cientifico a la creencia (como parte del metodo cientifico)

 

 

DISCUSSION:

WE NEED TO MODIFY SCIENTIFIC METHOD TO INCLUDE SUCH THINGS AS BELIEF!

 

     BELIEF, imagination  and their place in the Scientific Method:

Step 1) Observation, experience, measurement, collection of data, facts, history.  Little experience, usually implies little faith or belief, a lot of experience usually implies much more belief.  Education also is a way of gaining experience. - But that can include both good = "true" and bad = "false" beliefs, good and bad mental processes, & old (inhibiting) ways of thinking, and even bad data.

 

DISCUSION: ES NECESARIO MODIFICAR EL METODO CIENTIFICO PARA INCLUIR ESAS COSAS A LA CREENCIA!

La creencia, imaginacion y su lugar en el Metodo cientifico:

Paso 1) Observacion, experiencia, medicion, coleccion de datos, hechos, historia. La poca experiencia, generalmente implica poca fe o creencia, bastante experiencia generalmente implica bastante creencia. La educacion es tambien una forma de ganar experiencia. -Pero eso puede incluir ambos bueno= "Verdadero" y malo= "Falsas" creencias, procesos mentales buenos y malos, y viejos (inhibicion) de formas de pensar, e incluso datos malos.

 

Step 2) Imagination type I: this is required before we arrive at a belief, we must concoct a pattern into which the belief will be formed, and must have words, often words without present referents, with which to express the belief. WE THINK WITH WORDS, and words can constrain our thought process, our beliefs. So we invent words that may later turn out NOT to exist, and we need a way to mark and eliminate such potentially inhibiting words that we used without referent, because of the possible later negative results. Only when we have the referent, should we clear the question mark from such words.

 

Paso 2) Imaginacion tipo I: Esto es requerido antes de arribar a la creencia, debemos confeccionar un patron en el cual la creencia va a ser formado, y debe tener palabras, frecuentemente palabras sin referencias presentes, con los cuales expresar la creencia. PENSAMOS EN PALABRAS, y las palabras pueden encerrar nuestro proceso mental, nuestras creencias. Inventamos palabras que luego se tornan en NO para existir, y necesitamos una forma para marcar o eliminar esas potencialidades, inhibiendo palabras que usamos sin referencia, por los posibles resultados negativos posteriores. Solo cuando tenemos lo refernte, debemoa aclarar la pregunta marcada por esas palabras.

 

 

Step 3) Needs, dreams, wishes, wants, desires, ambition, aspiration, passions, even lust and obsessions; value judgements of how we wish things to be.  "Necessity is the mother of invention" -If we did not have a discontent, a dissatisfaction and a desire for better things, we would not make any progress; These are the motivation, incentive, these are the drive to beliefs. Particularly dreams of things you would like to happen.

 

This leads to Step 4): Belief, faith -  conviction, expectation, hope, trust.

DOGMA: Belief later can be converted into Dogma, which is a dangerous form of belief as it has been crystallized and usually lacks the ability to seek new things. It is dead ended, futile, barren belief. The antidote to this dogmatic restraint is skepticism and cynicism.

 

Paso 3) Necesidades, sueños, deseos, gustos, ambisiones, aspiraciones, pasiones, incluso anhelo y obsecion; valor juicio de como queremos que las cosas sean. "La necesidad es la madre de la invensiones"- Si no tenemos descontento, una desatisfaccion y un deseo por mejores cosas, nosotros no tendriamos ningun progreso; Estos son las motivaciones, incentivos, esto es el empuje de la creencia. Particularmente el sueño de las cosas que uno desea que pasen.

 

 

Step 5) more imagination type II -  based on wishes and prior imagination and belief, we now try to from patterns that allow the imagination to be brought into reality, "what if" - and where would this lead us?  This particularly includes dreams of HOW TO DO the things you would like to happen. - This is the "how to" stage. leading to actions.


 

Paso 5) Mas imaginacion Tipo II - Basado en deseos e imaginaciones previas y creencias, ahora tratamos de formarnos patrones que nos permiten traen nuestra imaginacion a  la realidad, "Que si" - y a donde nos conducirá esto?. Esto incluye particularmente sueños de COMO HACER las cosas que uno quiere que pasen. -Este es el estado de "COMO HACER" que nos conduce a la accion.

 

Late Step 5) Creativity, innovation, testing of the belief, and finding inductions to make something totally new that has never existed before.

Thus this fits into the motivation (curiosity) of the Scientific Method.

 

Segundo Paso 5) Creatividad, innovacion, examinacion de la creencia, y busqueda de inducciones para hacer algo totalmente nuevo que nunca existio antes. Asi esto entra de la motivacion (curiosidad) del Metodo Cientifico.

 


Step 6 Actions, this is "experimentation" - the reason for belief, the fruit of creativity; as belief without action is dead, futile, barren.

 

Thus belief leads to the hypothesis; Belief is often an untested "fuzzy" feeling, even an emotion that causes us to stop and try clearly to state in words the more formless belief, and to crystalize the belief into a more concrete form. It is something we do not quite know, but is a forerunner of knowledge. It is the seed, and needs to be nurtured to allow it to grow. We must cultivate our beliefs. But like all seeds, is a belief a good seed or a weed? We also need to be able to select and weed out the undesirable beliefs to allow the others to mature properly, and to eliminate those beliefs that sap our mental strength without ever showing hope of bearing fruit. Particularly those weeds that show no promise of ever bearing fruit need to be gardened out so we do not waste time and energy - and value - money and effort - on them.

 

Paso 6 Acciones, esto es "experimentacion" -La razon para creer, el fruto de la creatividad; como la creencia sin la accion es muerto, futil, esteril.

 

Asi la creencia conduce a la hipotesis. La creencia es con frecuencia un sentimiento no examinado "borroso", incluso una emocion que nos causa parar y tratar claramente para enunciar en palabras las creencias sin forma, y cristalizar la creencia en la forma mas concreta. Es la semilla y necesita ser nutrido para permitilo crecer. Debemos cultivar la creencia. Pero como toda las semillas, es la creencia una buena semilla o una mala hierba?. Tambien necesitamos ser capaces de seleccionar y sacar las creencias indeseadas para permitir a los otros madurar apropiadamente, y eliminar esas creencias que debilitan nuestra fuerza mental sin incluso mostrar esperanza o fruto. Particularmente esas semillas que no prometen o no tiene fruto necesiatan ser sacadios, asi no perdemos tiempo y energia - valor- dinero y esfuerzo- en ellos.

 

 

     Belief lies in the same general category as Hope, Faith, Beauty, ESP or PSI (or HSP, Higher Sensory Perception), and many similar intangibles. It is mental, and it represents a mental state, thus relates into value. It has to do with aspirations, desires, wishes, and expectations.

     Two key words to consider are objective and subjective. Belief or perhaps faith, seem to be conclusions reached without sufficient data, a jump from some limited observations, to an unwarranted conclusion that is an "induction", far beyond what the observations will support. We also have beliefs about things that we can not prove, in fact are beyond the realm of proof, and even things that we can never "prove". This faith in God, and belief in fairies, or spirits, or such has both been a help and a hinderance.

 

     La creencia se funda en la misma categoria general que la esperanza, fe, hermosura, Persepcion extrasensorial, y smuchos similares no mesurables. Es mental, y representa un estado mental, asi se relaciona dentro del valor. tiene que hacer con las aspiraciones, deseos, gustos y expectaciones.

     Dos palabras claves para considerar son Objestivos y subjetivos. La creencia o quizas la fe, parecen ser las conclusones alcanzadas sin suficientes datos. Un paso de alguna observacion limitada, hacia a una conclusion no garantizada es una "induccion", Mas alla de eso la observacion va a apoyar. Tambien tenemos creencias sobre las cosas que no podemos probar, e incluso cosas que nunca podemos "Probar". Esta fe en Dios, y creencia en adas, o espiritus, o cosas asi  ha sido una ayuda y un impedimiento.

 

     Because belief constrains our actions, what we do- what we attempt, or what we create, it can limit our choices. It involves a type of evaluation. It can be negative. Thus a negative believe that something is impossible will prevent the person from trying it.  Only if we believe that some-thing is possible will we try it. This also implies that we should be VERY careful in what we label as impossible, or "bad" since it may also keep us from making any progress. 

 

     Porque la creencia encierra nuestras acciones, que hacemos, que intentamos, o que creamos, puede limitar nuestraeleccion. Esto envuelve un tipo de evaluacion. Puede ser negativo. Asi una creencia negativa quealgo es imposible va a prevenir a la persona de tratar de probar. Esto implica que tambien debemos ser MUY cuidadosos de que es lo que designamos como imposible, o "malo" ya que eso nos detiene de hacer cualquier progreso.

 

     We need to open up our beliefs to cast out all the tired old limitations, and to clear our minds from the clutter of old ball and chain fetters that keep us from making progress.  If any assumption places a limitation it probably is restricting, limiting, harmful and perhaps even worse, unscientific, it may be - almost certainly is opposed to science and scientific method. It prevents free inquiry.

 

     Necesitamos abrir nuestra creencias para eliminar todas la viejas y cansadas restricciones, y aclarar nuestras mentes de la confusion y las cadenas que nos detiene de hacer el progreso.  Si alguna suncion nos pone una limitacion eso probablemente es una restriccion, limitante, peligrosa y quizas peor, no cientifico, eso puede ser - casi ciertamente opuesto a la ciencia y al metodo cientifico. Previene libre determinacion.

 

     POSITIVE BELIEF is a required state of mind if we are to make progress.  That is not to say that everything is possible, and there is nothing that will not work, but it does imply we should "never say never" without a very strong reason. We need to fantasize, and them try to make our fantasy come true. We need to be guided by history, past successes and past failures, but we also must avoid artificial barriers which we ourselves build in our minds. Open minds means open opportunities,  closed minds means lost or restricted opportunities. 

 

LA CREENCIA POSITIVA es un estado de la mente necesario si vamos a hacer algun progreso. No es para decir que todo es posible, y que no hay nada que va a funcionar, pero eso implica que "Nunca debemos decir nunca" sin una razon muy poderosa. Necesitamos fantasear, y luego tratar de hacer nuestra fantasia reslidad. Necesitamos ser guiados por la Historia, triunfos y fraczos pasados, pero tambien debemos evitar barreras artificiales el cual nosotros mismos fabricamos en nuestra mente. Mentes abiertas significa oportunidades abiertas, mentes cerradas significa perdida ou oportunidades restringidas.

 

 

 

     While I would not go quite so far as to say open mind is unlimited opportunity, I would say that we will only run into natural barriers, and not artificial ones we build for ourselves.

     The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle (HUP) comes to mind as a form of belief that has caused us a limitation that has been self imposed that probably is a false limitation. The real derivation of HUP does not say what it has been interpreted to say. What is does say is that USING PHOTONS to observe something, we may not SIMULTANEOUSLY measure both position and momentum (or Energy and time) and that the error of the simultaneous measurement using photons must equal or exceed Planck's constant, h. The key restrictions of using photons (which may not be meaningful since everything, all mass, may be photonic), & "simultaneous" both have not been realized and in fact they have been generalized out of the derivation to place unreal and unnecessary limits on experimentation; i.e. we may measure both terms, but they must come from two different measurements, done at different times, or in different places.

 

     Mientras que no puedo ir muy lejos y decir que la mente abierta es una oportunidad ilimitada, yo diría que solo podemos movernos dentro de las barreras naturales, y no las artificiales construidas por nosotros mismos.

 

Por Ej: El Principio de Incertidumbre de Heisenberg(PIH) viene a la mente como una forma de creencia de interpretacion errada; y la creencia errada causa limitaciones. La derivacion real del PIH ha sido interpretado incorrectamente, en realidad lo que dice es que: USANDO FOTONES para observar algo, no podemos medir SIMULTANEAMENTE ambos posicion y momentum (o energia y tiempo) y que el error de la medicion simultanea usando fotones debe igualar o exceder la constante (h) de Plank. Las restricciones claves del uso de fotones (el cual no puede ser significativo ys que todo, las masas pueden ser fotonicos), y "simultaneo" ambos no han sido realizados y en efecto estos han sido generalizados de la derivacion para poner limites irreales e innecesarios en al experimentacion. Ejm: debemos medir amdos terminos, pero estos deben venir de diferentes mediciones, hechos en diferentes tiempos o en diferentes lugaraes.

 

     People who cling to disproved beliefs "like oysters clinging to a rock" limit themselves, and that alone perhaps is a reason why nature has death, to help discard from our racial memory disproved beliefs. It is a mechanism to sweep out the garbage occasionally. But unfortunately we also believe in things we WISH were true but which are not true. These persist past individual deaths, passed on from generation to generation. The charlatan, con men and fortune tellers, the religious con men, and most purveyors of ESP rely on this wish to perpetuate frauds, and separate those gullible believers from their tangible values. Thus one incorrect (wishful) intangible value can interfere with real tangible values, or at least retaining them.

 

SIDE NOTE: the good advise in astrology has kept it alive for millennia. Perhaps we need to summarize all that generally good advise into one place, and have a list of do's and don'ts which are always good (or bad)- nonspecific generalities that can be applied specifically.

 

     La gente que se adhiere a creencias erroneas "como ostras adheridas ala roca" se limitan a ellos mismos, ese solo hecho quizar es el porque la naturaleza es muerta, para ayudar a descartar de nuestra memoria creencias raciales erroneas. Hay un mecanismo para sacar todo lo incervible de nuestra mente ocasionalmente. Pero desafortunadamente nosotros creemos tambien en cosas que DESEAMOS que fueran ciertos, pero que no son ciertos. Esto persiste incluso despues que el individuo muere pasando de generacion en generacion.

 

Los charlatanes, adivinos, brujos, los inpostores religiosos y la mayoria de los provedores de persecepcion extrasensorial confian en esto para perpetuar sus fraudes, y sacar dinero y valores tangible de los credulos feligreses. Asi un incorrecto (deseo) de valor no mesurable puede interferir con valor real tangible, o por lo menos retenerlos.

 

NOTA: El "buen consejo" en Astrología lo mantiene vivo por milenios. Quizas necesitamos resumir todos esos generalmente buenos consejos dentro de un lugar, y tener por lo menos los pro- y contras- los que son siempre buenos (o malos) generalidades noespecificas que especialmente pueden ser aplicados.

 

     BELIEF is judgmental, or is related to judgement, and thus Ethics. It can involve arbitrary values. In fact these arbitrary- often hidden- assumptions make up all too much of our behavior pattern. But we can not do without belief. We need faith to make progress. We need to have dissatisfactions to seek a "better way", and a belief that something better can be found before we will create that new something better.

     Belief is thus linked to imagination, inventiveness, innovation and creativity, originality. Belief is fundamental to progress, or the alternative: stagnation and social collapse.

     Which comes first imagination or belief?  Belief rests in part upon untested assumptions, things of the imagination. The actions that create comes after the belief.

    

     LA CREENCIA es juicio o esta ligado al juicio, y por lo tanto a la Etica. Puede envolver valores arbitrarios. En efecto esta arbitrariedad- con frecuencia escondidas- asunciones hacen todo de nuestros patrones de comportamiento. Pero no podemos hacer sin la creencia. Necesitamos tener fe para hacer el progreso. Necesitamos tener desatisfacciones para buscar "mejores caminos", y una creencia que algo mejor puede ser encontrado antes de crear ese algo mejor.

     La creencia esta pues ligao a la imaginacion, a la invension, a la innovacion y creatividad, a la originalidad. La creencia es fundamental para el progreso, o la alternativa: estancamiento y colapso social.

 

     Cual viene primero: La imaginacion o la creencia? la creencia descansa en parate sobre asunciones no examinadas, cosas de la imaginacion. la accion que crea viene despues de la creencia.

  

 

 

Home ] Feedback ] Contents ] Search ]

Send mail to Jhlawr@wmconnect.com with questions or comments about this web site.
Copyright © 2002 The Nexial Institute