All the world’s a stage for what?

To see the sciences as giving the best truths of their kind does not require seeing the world as a stage upon which scientific play is being performed. Even if all these scattered, irreducible accounts somehow added up to a description of the whole, it could all be a subplot in a fundamentally moral or personal or social or religious story. A man might be horrified or elated by the idea that it’s all just quarks and space-time and selection and testing and cataloging data, but by doing so he makes these things objects and plot-devices in a human drama.

Reach out an touch the wall. Ask yourself “what’s this?” or “is this all there is?” form an opinion one way or another, or just wonder about it. Now assume that all the right answers have terms like quarks or neurons or natural selection. Even if this is true, is the scene itself is not a scientific scene. It is a person questioning in the everyday world, in a concrete reality of particulars, one-off circumstances, unreapeatable experiences. In my own case, the scene is kids bouncing on the couch, and a baby in the carpet chewing on a plastic streamer, while I touch the wall and wonder.

Spell Check. Publish.

1 Comment

  1. Leonhard said,

    December 8, 2012 at 6:31 am

    Or how I learned to stop worrying about my epistology and love the gushing of my emotions. 😛

    Spellcheck, publish!

%d bloggers like this: