File spoon-archives/bhaskar.archive/bhaskar_1996/96-09-09.212, message 55


Date: Mon, 19 Aug 1996 21:34:32 -0500
From: derekh-AT-yorku.ca (Derek Hrynyshyn)
Subject: Re: Science on another planet


In reply to Hans'

Without digressing, let me just say that I was not offended, merely
confused at where the critical points Hans raised came from. (I am, by the
way, not an American but a Canadian and we have a reputation for being even
more polite and passive than Americans. How do you get 20 Canadians out of
a swimming pool? - Say "would everyone please leave the pool". :> )

But on a more serious note, I think that Hans' reply about science on
another planet makes the same mistake that Bhaskar makes, (inadvertently -
I  don't think the mistake is inherent in transcendental realism) assuming
that the scientific theories that we have developed are the only possible
correct one. I admit that it is difficult to imagine different ways to come
up with scientific explanations that would work as well as ours do, but
that may not be anything to do with the structure of the universe - instead
it may be a product of our own natures.

Perhaps other planet's inhabitants would produce scientific theories in a
different chronological order than ours - perhaps they would discover
electricity before gravity, or magnetism before the periodic table or
something like that. In which case perhaps they have already discovered
things that we haven't discovered yet, and vice versa.

There might be all kinds of reasons to develop different representations of
the real mechanisms of our shared universe, perhaps involving mechanisms
that we have not yet learned to represent. They need not be quite so exotic
as Hans' neutrino amoebas, but might be able to perceive, say, magnetic
forces the way we perceive light. Or they might have some more heightened
sense of balance and might be able to detect the change in gravitational
forces as they gain altitude on their planet. Or something like that.

But we probably agree on this: If species were to develop on two different
planets and both were to develop space travel so that they could meet, then
they would probably have to have come up with the same astrophysics. But to
assume that they would get there along exactly the same paths of scientific
discovery, discovering things in exactly the same order, is to assume that
we have discovered things the only way possible and that no one else could
do as much as we have done unless they did it exactly the same way we have
done it.

This kind of thinking reminds me of standard imperialist ideas about the
rest of the world traditionally held by Euro-American culture (from which I
do not exclude myself) which is why I use the term arrogance. I think
others use anthropomorphism or something.

I am also reminded that the Aztecs were able to build massive pyramids
lined up with the sun and stars and astrological events and had extremely
precise calendars but never managed to invent the wheel. (This fact has
always been incredible to me.)

Lastly, I am reminded of the Woody Allen film where Woody meets a crazy guy
who claims that he can prove that if there is life on other planets, that
they must have a Marxist political economy. :)

derek.


Derek Hrynyshyn,           Graduate Program
Phone: 650-2276               in Political Science,
derekh-AT-yorku.ca            York University    Ross S609

Communications Officer,      CUPE local 3903
cupe3903-AT-yorku.ca * Fax: 736-5480 * Office: 736 - 5154
http://www.yorku.ca/org/cupe/cupe3903.htm




   

Driftline Main Page

 

Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005