Yep, it’s hard to avoid getting caught up in the cultural biases of one’s own time. However, there is a way out of this trap—as Albert Einstein knew.
Adam Becker, in his book What Is Real?, explores how historical events and philosophical ideas affected theories of quantum physics over the decades. He reveals that just because nearly everyone believes in a theory does not mean it is true. Some theories stick around because of historical accidents, charismatic leaders, or philosophical trends.
Becker shows how physicists of the twentieth century tended to jump on the bandwagon instead of learning about and engaging with a variety of ideas; and he notes that this issue is still relevant today. He ends the book by endorsing Einstein’s antidote to the bandwagon trap. In 1944, Einstein wrote:
“So many people today—and even professional scientists—seem to me like somebody who has seen thousands of trees but has never seen a forest. A knowledge of the historic and philosophical background gives that kind of independence from prejudices of his generation from which most scientists are suffering. This independence created by philosophical insight is—in my opinion—the mark of distinction between a mere artisan or specialist and a real seeker after truth.”
Amen, Albert.
Amen, Albert indeed! š
š
There’s also this phenomenon called the ‘Observer effect’ that applies for physics see wiki
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Observer_effect_(physics)
Becker writes a lot about that in the book. š
Einstein seems to foresee the revolution (in the social sciences – not the natural sciences) started by Thomas Kuhn’s 1962 book The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. He was correct. No one can interpret scientific findings outside a paradigm that in most cases has been furnished by philosophy. This is a real pity when it comes to the biggest debate of all – the God debate. Right now the public side of that debate is dominated by people who create more heat than light. (I’m sure there are many good discussions going on in university philosophy and religious studies classes but, unfortunately, I never had the opportunity to take such a class.) A good place for us laypersons to start is the book The God Debate by the philosopher Gerald Benedict. One can’t read that book without realizing – whether the person is a theist or an atheist – that, alas, there are strong reasons on both sides of this old conflict. Presumably – eventually – reason will win out in the end and this debate between unpalatable extremes will undergo a dialectical synthesis of sorts and the public will be offered a more reasonable way of approaching this far reaching debate.
All this is very interesting … thanks for sharing these thoughts!