Metaman
|
Can the Principle of Complementarity Unite The Natural and Cultural Sciences? Date 2004-7-6 16:57 |
|
|||||||||||||
| [Reply it] [Refresh] |
Can the Principle of Complementarity Unite The Natural and
__________________________________________________________
Cultural Sciences?
__________________
Anthony Favale, MSW
afavale@mail.idt.net
(received: February 17, 1997)
One tragedy of our civilization is that whereas science has gone
forward, the separation of departments of knowledge has obscured
the essential connection between ideological humanistic philosophy
and the philosophy of natural science. As a consequence, our
ideological philosophies have not changed along with the changes
in our philosophy of the natural sciences. Thus we find ourselves
with a set of ideas grounded often in outmoded philosophies which
get into conflict with each other. Hence the conflict of moral
and social ideologies.
F.S.C. Northrop
Introduction
____________
Quantum theory has opened a new vista for metaphysics. One of its
outstanding contributions is the principle of complementarity introduced by
the Danish physicist, Niels Bohr. He presented complementarity to account for
conceptually incompatible results from different experiments---in one
experiment light showed itself to be a particle, in another it appeared as a
wave. It was not possible to observe the particle and wave in a single
experiment. Bohr, perhaps by an act of intuition, concluded that to resolve
this contradiction a wider frame of reference was needed. "...no experience is
definable without a logical frame and that any apparent disharmony can be
removed only by an appropriate widening of the conceptual framework." Niels
Bohr, "Unity of Human Knowledge---1954" in _Atomic Physics and Human
Knowledge_. Bohr realized that both particle and wave are necessary
complements in the action of electromagnetic energy.
Complementarity, Bohr surmised is nature's answer to the paradox of
particle/wave. He recognized that nature communicates to us piecemeal through
our experimental methods and instruments. But we have to be willing to broaden
our consciousness to incorporate the various segments of information we
accumulate into a comprehensive whole. To do so may require perceiving things
from a wider point of view.
Abraham Pais, Bohr's biographer, wondered,"...why is it that
complementarity---a concept defined and discussed at length...and which Bohr
himself considered his main contribution, is not mentioned in some of the
finest textbooks on physics, such as the one on quantum mechanics by Paul
Dirac, the historically oriented quantum mechanics text by Sin-itiro Tomonaga,
or the lectures by Richard Feynman?" One of the probable answers to this
question is that although complementarity is derived from the facts of quantum
physics, paradoxically, its heuristic value appears to be more relevant to the
sciences outside of physics.
Clement S. Jedrzejewski, a philosopher-sociologist, author of _Toward
A New Educational Order_, The Dialogist Press, 1970, developed a comprehensive
theory of civilization in which the complementarity principle is a significant
component.
Jedrzejewski's theory of civilization is based on a universal
ontological-functional definit ion of energy that is compatible with Bohr's
principle of complementarity. The goal of this essay is to explore the
relationship between Jedrzejewski's ontological platform and Bohr's principal
of complementarity as a foundation that may serve to integrate the natural and
social sciences. Philosophy has taken bad rap over the past four hundred
years, for the most part, because scientific methodology has been more
trustworthy in the exposition of valid knowledge and because philosophy has
been converted into diverse ideologies fostering political and religious
combat. As Northrop stated: "our ideological philosophies have not changed
along with the changes in our philosophy of the natural sciences." When Niels
Bohr introduced the principle of complementarity, he was convinced that
quantum theory was a complete description of quantum reality. Albert Einstein
disagreed with Bohr's interpretation of the quantum description because it
was not consistent with the facts of classical physics. Einstein viewed the
"Copenhagen Interpretation," the reference given to the work by Bohr, Werner
Heisenberg and others at the Institute of Theoretical Physics in Copenhagen,
to be premature, and to counter its influence Einstein, Boris Podolsky and
Nathan Rosen published a paper, now known as the EPR paper. The thrust of
this paper challenged the validity of the Bohr-Heisenberg contribution
to quantum theory. They held that the definition of objective reality is
incompatible with the assumption that quantum mechanics is a complete
theory. Einstein theorized incorrectly that the quantum phenomenon
harbored hidden variable that once discovered would resolve the
contradictions between classical physics and quantum mechanics. He felt
strongly that the Copenhagen interpretation was no longer physics, but
rather bordered on religion.
Einstein's irritation with the conclusions of the Institute of
Theoretical Physics was thus put into words:
The Heisenberg-Bohr tranquilizing philosophy---or religion?---is
so finely chiseled that it provides a soft pillow for believers...
This religion does damned little for me.
[Quoted from Einstein in _Niels Bohr's Times_, by Abraham Pais]
Bohr responded to his critics:
There is no quantum world. There is only an abstract quantum
physical description. It is wrong to think that the task of
physics is to find how nature is. Physics concerns what we can
say about nature.
[A quotation from _Neils Bohr's Times_, by Abraham Pais]
Bohr made a sharp distinction between physics and metaphysics. Nature
through quantum physics professes two principles: complementarity and
uncertainty. These are the principles that many physicists rejected early on.
In the final stages of Einstein-Bohr debate, it can be said that they were no
longer discussing physics, but like the Presocratics they were arguing a
philosophical point of view concerning the essence of reality. John Bell and
Alain Aspect corroborated each others research in substantiating that the
quantum description is complete. All we can know of deep reality is its forms
of presentation to our instruments of detection together with our senses and
the operations of our mind. One unpredicted outcome of quantum theory is that
it has revived interest in philosophizing about the nature of reality
processes.
Philosophizing is the outcome of a person's rational and intuitive
thoughts as they are directed in a dialogue with others toward an in depth
understanding of essential processes inherent in nature, culture and the human
condition. Henri Bergson in his _Introduction to Metaphysics_ highlights the
role of reason and intuition both in science and philosophy in deciphering
reality processes. Philosophy as a discipline arose out of the human need to
fathom the dynamics of transformation processes in which mankind participates.
One assumption underlying philosophy is that reality is interconnected in a
web of interdependent relationships. The goal of philosophy is to decode the
paradigm or dynamism through which this unity is organized. Throughout history
many definitions of what constitutes essential reality have been offered not
only by philosophers, but also by theologians and most recently by physicists.
Questions asked millennia ago by philosophers remain current today in the
work of nuclear physicists. Natural philosophy began with the Greeks of
Miletus. They wanted to know the source of generation and transformation
(metamorphosis) in the natural world. They thought it necessary to
apprehend the essence of this reality in order to understand the diversity
and complexity of nature. Some of them believed simple material elements
create the complexities of nature. By building rational categories
corresponding to essential elements, it was thought possible to assemble a
coherent, consistent, universal, body of knowledge. The natural sciences
developed out of this assumption.These sciences have brought about astonishing
transformations in the natural and cultural environment of the human race.
At this time in history we have at our disposal an enormous body of
information, the contribution of a multitude of sciences. Science may
be considered a brance of philosophy if we accept the opinion that reality
is a web of relations and that the whole is greater than the sum of its
parts. But there is no science capable of synthesizing the knowledge
accumulated by all the sciences. There is no science of the sciences
because each science is locked in its particular domain and cannot extend
beyond itself without losing its identity. Today as in history, philosophy's
principal aimis to create a rational model that corresponds to reality
processes.
Clement S. Jedrzejewski, in his monograph, _Toward A New Educational
Order_ provides a penetrating historical interpretation of philosophy. He
notes that philosophy departed from its original goal as a consequence of
historical happenstance.
The function of philosophy in its pristine period was the
quest of philosophizing. Socrates in Greece and a number of
religious philosophers in the East were philosopher-dialogists.
With the increase and amassing of civilizational problems
together with the creation of various communities there appeared
philosophers who were system builders, analysts and synthesizers,
Platonian-Aristotelian types. The first system builders were
innovators. They were few, but they had a large number of
students whose creativity was expressed by way of interpreting
and by partially transforming the inherited systems. Soon political
and religious leaders found that philosophical systems could be
used as a rationalization to promote their political and
theological agendas, or they could be used as an instrument
of intellectual conquest of their enemies or as a means of
apologetic defense. Thus there appeared philosopher-kings,
philosopher-demagogues, both radical and conservative, and moral
burden, a Baconian Idol.
In the same monograph Jedrzejewski states:
Philosophy does not arrive at perennially certified answers,
notwithstanding the fact that there are interminable philosophical
questions which are expressed and responded to in a language
relevant to the actual conditions of the period in which they
arise. Unlike technology, a domain where one can expect a linear
progression of solutions to technical problems, philosophical
questions are open ended. They are never completely answered to
the satisfaction of all thinkers of any period. Each generation
is required to address them anew.
Physics is not philosophy, yet quantum theory has touched a
philosophical nerve. Intuitively we know that the universe and humankind are
united in many ways. We are aware that we are dependent on the very air we
breath as well as the fauna and flora and natural resources of the earth. Our
planetary system is part of the Milky Way and so we are bound to the universe.
Yet reality processes are so varied that our understanding of our world is
limited by the definitions we create philosophically or through the logical
formulations of the sciences. Over the past four centuries reason has been
pitted against experiment. Much of the thinking in Western culture has taken
on the flavor of opposites or more formally speaking, dialectics.
Dialectics or the theory that transformation takes place through the
clash of opposites is challenged by the principle of complementarity. Is not
the opposite of something its negation? The opposite of "white" is the
negation of "white", not "black." The relation between "opposite" concepts can
better be labeled "polarities" whose poles are united by complementarities.
By way of example, if we examine the light spectrum, the poles would be the
colors: red and violet; the complementarities: the colors orange, yellow,
green, blue, and indigo. The opposite of red, therefore, is not violet but
rather non-red. Other apparent "opposites" can be united through their
complementarities.
Our ability to understand reality is limited by the concepts we use to
explain it. Language follows thought. Thoughts arise to consciousness as a
consequence of interactions arising internally within ourselves and externally
with the environment, i.e., experientially. Following a period of incubation
experience gives birth to conscious ideas, sometimes providing solutions to
the riddles of nature. Language, the vehicle of thoughts, is limited in its
representations---it is said that we know more than we can say, i.e., we have
tacit knowledge that far exceeds our explicit knowledge. The total
accumulated knowledge in any period of history is only an approximation of
what is yet to be known. This idea suggests that changing reality represents a
maturation process working in the universe and within individuals and
communities.
The aim of classical philosophy was to define the essence of reality.
There were many proposed paths to achieve this objective. The path outlined by
Leucippus and Democritus proved to be very rewarding---it led to the
development of classical physics. But, classical physics turned out to not
reveal all of natures secrets; physicists discovered the complement to
classical physics in the quantum description. The problem with a metaphysical
concept such as "being" is that we have no operational definition representing
it. Hypothetically, "being" may be defined as a form of essence, and essence
may be defined as energy having an analogical relationship to the action of
the wave-particle.
Metaphysics and Science: The Problem of Essence and Form
_________________________________________________________
Knowledge also is surely one; each part
of it that commands a certain field is
marked off and given a name proper to
itself.
[Plato]
Universally human beings have always desired to understand how the
many dimensions of reality impinging on one's senses are interconnected. Our
ancestors always assumed an invisible reality, mysterious yet essential, an
essence, behind all things visible. Today as in ancient times we search for
that fundamental something which when apprehended would reveal the essential
nature of reality allowing us to comprehend truth, justice and to realize our
human potential. Plato, the great Athenian synthesizer of earlier
philosophical schools, who in his attempt to build bridges between conflicting
philosophical models of reality, defined essence as the "Ideas", or "Forms",
an assortment of prototypes of which all sensible things are mere ephemeral
reflections. He surmised that there is a reality behind what is perceived as
changing phenomena. This hidden reality he believed to be the essence of
transformation. Plato's student, Aristotle, disagreeing with his master,
defined essence as a kind of substance, a basic something from which all things
are formed, not something existing outside of things. Nevertheless Aristotle
wondered as his predecessors if there could be a science of that which is
intrinsic in nature, that can explain transformation and the diversification
and plurality of things. He named this potential science, "metaphysics"---the
rational pursuit of that "essence" or "being" which gives rise to natural
phenomena. Essence may be defined as that dynamism in whose absence existence
would be the existence of nothing. According to modern physics energy is the
fundamental stuff of everything. According to Einstein matter is energy.
Material things are formations of energy. Although physicists have not
completed their work in nuclear physics, we know that energy is dynamic and
therefore it would follow that a paradigm of reality would best reflect some
kind of dynamic movement. Neither Plato's "Ideas" nor Aristotle's "Substance"
allows for the unification of experience and rational thought in the
formulation of a model of reality.
A model of reality must be consistent with the research findings of
the sciences. The key to any meaningful study of natural and cultural
processes: psychological, social, educational, religious or political is one
that will lead to an understanding of the underlying dynamics of energy
transformations in which all the sciences have their roots. Each science has
its unique method of studying its subject matter. Since all aspects of
reality are interconnected, we are compelled to ask how knowledge accumulated
by each science can be synthesized to allow for a comprehensive understanding
of the world within and around us.
Creative energy is, as far as is known, the basis of all existence.
Energy is formalized in particles, atoms, molecules, etc. We cannot perceive
energy in its pure state; we can only perceive energy formations as they
impinge on our senses. Energy as it climbs the evolutionary scale is
externalized into the myriad forms of nature.
When we put the bits and pieces of accumulated knowledge together, we
find that it is possible to construct rather primitive sentences that
partially describe the world revealed to us through our senses so far. These
sentences, whose verbs are radiant energy and whose nouns are accumulations of
matter, appear to have a direction---they all seem to move toward increasingly
complex communities or systems. Don Fabun
Definition of Essence and Form
______________________________
Clement Jedrzejewski formulated his theory of civilization on an
ontological foundation. His ontology is defined by the following postulates:
1. The whole (macro cosmos) is the cosmos conceived as the
universe including mankind and our planet.
2. The cosmos is moving, changing due to the action of creative
energy.
3. The basic unit of the whole is every act (micro cosmos)
which is externalized in a situation, creating or
changing it.
4. The essence of the whole (macro cosmos) and all acts
(micro cosmos) is creative energy.
5. Energy exhibits three functions: creating, accumulating,
exchanging. (The participles are used instead of noun
forms in order to stress that reality is a process of
continuous action.)
Postulate #4 needs its logical complement in an operational
definition of form. As a consequence of postulate #3, form should
also be defined as a creative act, otherwise it would not be a
quality which makes anything what it is.
By combining Bohr's principle of complementarity with Jedrzejewski's
ontological definitions we may hypothesize that particle energy is energy
accumulating, P=A/e; wave energy is energy exchanging, W=E/e. The particle
and wave are complements of an energy field which is energy creating, F=C/e.
Hypothetically, the particle-wave-field dynamism constitutes a universal
paradigm embracing natural and cultural phenomena. The gravitational,
electromagnetic and nuclear fields function in a complementarity of action in
the formation and transformation of the universe. Human energy is
complementary to cosmic energy and constitutes the dynamism underlying
civilization. The source of transformation is not "matter" which is but a
form of essence but transformation is a fundamental consequence of dynamic
energy inherent in all processes. Forms (atoms, molecules, cells, organisms
etc.), are externalizations of energy in time-space. Things or objects of
consciousness are the products of this same process. It is the dynamic field
(creative energy) that is the source of particle formation.
Jedrzejewski's concept is further elaborated in the following
paragraph.
Energy is constantly moving, producing forms, arranging
situations. The division into creating, accumulating, exchanging
is hypothetical and conceptual. In reality, these actions are
complementing each other in the very moment of action. We may
designate one action as exchanging; it means this action is dominating
in a particular moment in time-space. This domination of exchange
may be more dynamic in one moment but may be succeeded by a then
weaker action of creating. There is an alteration of these actions
in various sequences, there is rhythmic movement of energy---there
is rhythm.
Jedrzejewski extended his ontological postulates to a definition of
civilization.
1. Energy is structuralized and its forms, both individual and
social, depend on the relationship between its three
functions: creating, accumulating and exchanging.
2. Civilization is in reality, the civilizational process.
It is the anthropogenetic process; that is, the movement
of human energy, which has three ways of acting: creating,
accumulating and exchanging of goods, values and services.
3. Culture is the totality of externalized forms produced by
these functions: creating, accumulating and exchanging.
4. Among the societal forms of structuralized anthropogenetic
energy, the most important are the cellular communitas
(family) and the political-territorial community
(town, city, state, etc.)
The civilization process is analogous to the dynamics of
electromagnetic energy. Cultural phenomena are like particles of
physical entities, such as electrons, protons, and neutrons. The
action of some of these entities is hidden, while the action of
others is evident and can be analyzed, described and expressed in
symbols. These particles, as phenomena, have their individuality
and their genesis. Furthermore, they can be united on the basis of
complementarity, forming greater syntheses, and used for various
purposes, as cultural units can do. They are operating within the
framework of the civilizational process, and we may call them cultural
elements. But, they are not atoms, or independent monads of
civilization. They can be visualized as active, as moving. Cultural
phenomena are the products of action---as goods, services and values.
Some cultural elements can be seen and counted, while others, for
example, values, are not always known, observable, or registered.
Hypothesizing that the principle of complementarity forms the
foundation of an essential order in nature and culture, and combining
complementarity with Jedrzejewski's ontological definitions we are able to
classify analogically the complementary relationships between the various
sciences and their subject matter.
Figure 1 represents a classification based on the principle of
complementarity depicting the various natural systems in an operation of
analogical relationships of one universal paradigm. It is possible to
classify the formal aspects of reality processes according to the principle of
complementarity.
Figure 1
Complementarity of Natural Systems
Cosmic Energy Accumulating Exchanging Creating
(Essential)
Cosmic Energy Particle Wave Vibrating
(Formal) Strings or
Fields
Field Forces Gravitation Electro- Nuclear
magnetic (strong/weak)
Atom Nucleus Electron Strong Force
Molecule Atoms Electrons Valence
(+ -)
Life Forms Protein RNA DNA
Human Brain Left Corpus Right
Hemisphere Callosum Hemisphere
In Figure 1 each level of natural systems is classified together with
its complements. The range of classification extends from nuclear particles to
the human brain.
Figure 2 illustrates the logical complementary components of some
logical systems.
Figure 2
Complementarity of Logical Systems
Accumulating Exchanging Creating
Social Sciences History Sociology Psychology
Economics Capital Commerce Production
Political Judicial Executive Legislative
Science Branch Branch Branch
(Government)
Theology
Hindu Vishnu Shiva Shatki
Christian Son Holy Spirit Father
Metaphysics Epistemology Axiology Ontology
The essential categories: Accumulating, Exchanging, Creating are
mutually exclusive, but are necessary for an understanding of the phenomena
they represent. The sciences also exist in a complementary relationship to one
another.
A more detailed illustration of the complementary function of human
conciousnes is given in Figure 3. The division of conciousnes is based on the
work of Gazzaniga, Sperry and Ornstein.
Figure 3
Complementarity of Consciousness
Psychology
I-(My)-Field
ACCUMULATING CREATING
Left Hemisphere Right Hemisphere
Consciousness Consciousness
Accumulated Experience of Creative Imagination:
Creativity: Life Experiences Vision
Working Memory (Ideas, Desires
Drives, Models)
Rational Considerations Intuition
Goal, Life Goal, Temporary Goal
EXCHANGING
Interaction of Right/Left Consciousness
Direction of
Thought and Action
Feeling
Thinking
Acting
Result of
Synthesis of Rationalized Goal
+ Vision
+ Technique and Ethics
of Direction
+ Access to Goods, Values, Services
Figure 4 classifies the various components of a corporate entitity according
to the ontological-complementary framework.
Figure 4
Complementarity in the Economic-Technological Field
CREATING ACCUMULATING EXCHANGING
GOODS Production Capital Marketing
Assets &
& Consumption
Inventory
VALUES Developing Theory\ Monograms\
Criteria\ Procedures\ Textbooks\
Theories\ Techniques\ Newsletters\
Planning Operations\ Conferences\
Research &
Development
SERVICES Formation of Pool of Programs
Technical & Technical in operation
Management &
Education Management
Programs Skills
Summary
________
The principle of complementarity is an important insight into the
logic of natural and cultural processes. Bohr's complementarity principle
although a mute subject in theoretical physics where it originated finds a
wide range of application when combined with Jedrzejewski's ontological
definition of reality processes. Although Bohr stated clearly that physics
is not metaphysics, the significance of complementarity for all the sciences
is given good support in the work of Clement Jedrzejewski. His comprehensive
efforts in philosophy and sociology appears to have turned the complementarity
principle into a universal paradigm.
-------------------------------------------------
Bibliography
____________
Bergson, Henri _Introduction To Metaphysics_, Philosophical
Library, New York, 1961
Bohr, Niels "Unity of Human Knowledge---1954" in _Atomic
Physics and Human Knowledge_
Fabun, Don _Dimensions of Change_, Glenco Press, 1971
Jedrejewski, Clement _Toward A New Educational Order_,
The Dialogist Press, Wilkes-Barre Pa. 1970
Luce, J.V. _An Introduction To Greek Philosophy_,
Thames and Hudson, London 1992
Ornstein, Robert Ed _The Nature of Human Consciousness_,
Viking Press, 1973
Pais, Abraham, _Nails Bohr's Times In Physics, Philosophy,
and Polity_, Cleradon Press, 1991
Wigner, E.P, _Physical Science and Human Values,
A symposium_, Princeton University Press, 1947
[Follow-ups]
Replying here is disabled according to your current 
