The functionality of
Science
in the Paradigm of Transcendent Reality

Science is our system of discovery – how we go about discovering Reality, and bringing more of Absolute Reality into the Map of reality that lies within our brain. The various disciplines of science are a weave of philosophical models and scientific discovery. Our science is our best window on Reality and our Environment. Yet science is approximate and incomplete, because we cannot, even with our best instruments extend our senses to see small enough, nor large enough, to glean all of Absolute Reality. Nor are our computers large enough to include all the complexities of Reality even if we did know it.

The Scientific Method is a key philosophical concept governing our discovery process. Not only do we require empirical testing of our theories, but we also require repeatability and independent verification, Transcendent Reality requires our science to be rigorous, brutally honest, and continually open to independent verification, further investigation, and scrutiny for contaminating factors. Our science is not required to be consistent with any pre-conceived ideas or beliefs except those that promote understanding and knowledge of that illusive thing called Reality. Indeed, the other aspects of Transcendent Reality, i.e., philosophy and religion, are required to be consistent with our scientific discoveries. But science is not infallible. We must always keep in mind that our picture of reality is always incomplete, and distorted by our instruments of observation, our techniques of modeling, our imperfect sense perceptions, and our perversity to see what we want to see.

Extensive theoretical modeling is employed in the various branches of science to model the environment around us and even to describe our selves. Theoretical models are a philosophical development. Without theoretical models, science would be just a collection of interesting, but largely useless facts. It is the theoretical model that gives us the capability to make predictions, and predictions allow us to manipulate our environment. We must be continually adjusting our theoretical models to reflect our latest scientific observations and discoveries, to increase the accuracy of our predictions.

In our schooling, science disciplines such as physics, chemistry, biology, and such are often taught as if they are absolute knowledge. But in fact, all of them are based on simplified and approximate theoretical models, which must be adjusted after every new scientific discovery. Indeed, sometimes the model has to be thrown out, and a new theory proposed to explain the discovery. This is so because all of our scientific models, or we could say philosophical models, are approximations to the real world. The real world, or reality, is incredibly complex, convoluted, and intertwined. Simplified models give us a workable medium to make predictions, and are often accurate enough for the purpose or the time. Over time, however, as our systems demand more precision, models must be refined, or in some cases completely revised.

Examples of scientific model refinement can be seen in linear measurement and in time measurement. For millenniums it was accurate enough to mark time by dawn, noon, and evening for fractions of a day, and by quarter moons for longer periods of time. Likewise, for linear measurement the length of a man's pace was accurate enough for conveying distance. But when manufacturing came into vogue, and lands began to be titled, such rough measurements were insufficient, and more precise measurements can into vogue with the invention of the sundial, later the mechanical clock, and now electronic and atomic clocks.

Likewise in lineal measurement, a man's pace was standardized as the length of a particular stick, and called a yard in English measuring units. Copies of the stick were accurately made and distributed. To illustrate, imagine buying a parcel of land 50 paces by 50 paces. A short man arrives and in 50 paces travels 40 meters. A tall man arrives and in 50 paces travels 80 meters. If you are the buyer, you will want the tall man's pace. If you are the seller you will want the short man's pace. Such inconsistencies soon became intolerable. To preclude disagreements and misunderstandings, all linear measurements were standardized (in the English system, on the standard yard; in the metric system, on the meter.)

In Transcendent Reality we include the scientific model under the category of philosophy, as well as science, to remind us of the ephemeral nature of our modeling, and of our discoveries. We conceive a theoretical model very much constrained by our limited knowledge of how things we cannot directly see might work. For instance, we can not see atoms or molecules directly, but deduce how they might look and act by how various substances react under certain stimuli, such as bombarding material with x-rays. Unfortunately, and too often, the stimulus itself disturbs the material being observed, and the results may thus be distorted to a degree not readily determinable, and thus our "knowledge" inaccurate and incomplete.

Not all things are discoverable by science. Indeed, the scientific model itself is a thing of philosophy, coming out of our intuition - gained often by a flash of insight in the mind's eye.

And science does not judge or give values. For that we must turn to religion.

Definitions

In our discussion of Transcendent Reality we try to use commonly agreed definitions of the meaning of words. In some instances we coin phrases, such as Transcendent Reality, and give it special meaning. In other case we give particular meaning to words, such as paradigm, and give it a broader meaning than a dictionary might. On the Definitions web page are the meanings of words used which have been extended, or might have more than one meaning. We give all the meanings, but shade to gray those meanings not used.

Understanding

To understand Transcendent Reality, one must also understand the nature of reality, philosophy, religion, governance, and the environment around us - and in our selves. The pursuit of knowledge and truth is not an easy task. The path is fraught with delusion, deception, illusion, secrecy, complexity, the limitations of our observational tools, and the conceptual limitation of the observer(s).