Logical Positivism

Logical positivism is a school of philosophy concerned with the logical analysis of scientific knowledge. The soundness of metaphysics and traditional philosophy are attacked and positivism asserts that many philosophical problems are meaningless. Instead, logical positivism argues that there are only two sources of knowledge: logical reasoning and empirical experience, or, analytic and synthetic. Logical reasoning is reducible to formal logic and experience is the only judge of scientific theories. Emotionalism and metaphysics are victims of “bad syntax”.

The primary tenet of logical positivism is the verificationist principle, or factual knowledge. Statements must be verifiable to have meaning. A statement that is not verifiable is meaningless, and not suitable for serious attention. To be verifiable a statement must be capable of being proved true or false, at least in principle. For example, “the pen exists” is a verifiable statement. The statement “God exists” is not. The existence of the pen can be proven by simply touching and seeing the pen. There is no condition in which the latter statement can be proven true or false, therefore it is not a meaningful question for the positivist.

Statements that have no immediate concrete provability can be accepted as meaningful. For example, the statement “a small formation of ice exists at latitude ‘x’ and longitude ‘y’ on Neptune cannot be evaluated today, but an experiment could be proposed that would allow it to be tested in the future if the proper spacecraft were built and launched for this purpose.

Positivism wants to put an end to the emotional and metaphysical, at least for scientific purposes. Emotions are subjective and not objectively provable. Non-factual statements have no place in scientific, and therefore, true knowledge. Metaphysical thinking is useless.

One way positivism attempts to destroy metaphysics is by strictly defining the syntax of meaningful statements. Strict criteria for determining the literal meaningfulness of sentences are constructed. A sentence has literal meaning if and only if the proposition it expresses is either analytic or empirically verifiable. Furthermore, the word “proposition” is reserved for what is expressed by sentences which are literally meaningful. Metaphysical arguments can be successfully debunked by detailed analysis and proved to be meaningless.

In adopting these verbal conventions, positivists relegate metaphysics into irrelevance. Science should purge itself of this crass disease which has infected philosophy for generations. Science is cumulative and inductive. Phenomenalism is assumed. The world can be divided into sets of discrete objects and scientific knowledge proceeds from bottom-up. Since metaphysics does not meet the analytic and empirical criteria it is forever banished from the light of day.

Positivists believe that theories develop from facts. Scientists perform experiments, gather sense-data, correlate, classify and categorize. Theories are deducible from premises or experiences because of empirical patterns that emerge. Therefore, positivists support the inductive method of scientific laws and theories. Facts produce theories. Theories are inferred from direct observation of objects and processes. The truth of theories can only be acknowledged by experience.

The positivist philosophy of the relations between fact and theory are in direct conflict with deduction. Where deduction starts with a hypothesis or, heaven forbid, metaphysical inspiration, induction applies a sharp razor to logical and factual statements, eliminating the metaphysics and recording the atomic experiences. These atomic facts are correlated and progress upward through raw facts, sub-laws, laws, super laws, and ultimately theories.

Weaknesses of positivism as a theory of knowledge and as a cultural phenomenon are apparent. As a theory of knowledge weaknesses are rooted in the principle of verification and the assumption of phenomenalism. Positivism as a cultural phenomenon has flaws regarding the elimination of metaphysics and the impossibility of ethical theory. While positivism has largely been discredited as a general cultural philosophy, the useful tools for scientific philosophy have survived.

A strict interpretation of the verification principle seeks absolute criteria for the verification of scientific theories. Few philosophers of science still seek these absolute criteria, noting that no theory can ever be exposed to all possible relevant tests. Real science is much more about probability rather than absolute verifiability. In this respect, the positivists are too much in the ivory tower of philosophical theory rather than closely connected with the realities of science.

Phenomenalism is the view that physical objects, properties and events are mapped to corresponding mental objects, properties and events. Ultimately, only mental objects, properties and events really exist. A physical object is a collection of sense-data. That is, for the individual, the physical world is all just a construction of the specific individual’s sense-data.

Several weaknesses of phenomenalism are apparent. A strict phenomenalistic interpretation cannot allow for things that are too small or brief to be seen. What about quantum physics phenomena? Unperceived objects and hypotheticals cannot exist, which would negate much of the evidence from science history in the modern world. Abstract natural concepts such as space, time, cause-effect, mass and energy are not addressed with this view either. Phenomenalism does not allow for construction of reality which begins in the mind, or a more deductive approach to scientific progress.

The elimination of metaphysics has negative consequences as a cultural phenomenon. The fundamental problem with eliminating metaphysics is the tendency to marginalize the role of intuition and imagination in science or other activities. Examples of important science and theories developing from an intuitive concept or inspiration exist in the fields of physics and genetics in the personalities of Einstein and McClintock. These scientists and others have developed theories that originated from an internal model of reality. Experiments are then devised to prove the model.

Real-world science proceeds in a variety of ways. Some science, probably most science, develops through the positivist/induction method of correlated facts to laws to theories. These paradigms may become standard and drive further sense-data experiments within the paradigm. However, some theories are more aesthetic and model-driven, and this drive to realize the vision of the model is what determines which experiments to perform.

Another criticism of positivism and the verifiability principle from a cultural perspective is the impossibility of a theory of ethics. Statements about ethics are neither true nor false. They are expressions of feeling. But if ethics is meaningless, what is the origin of ethical principles?

Schlick was one positivist who considered ethics as a descriptive scientific theory: good is whatever gives pleasure and no pain. The first ethics impulse is an egoistic one. However, it is possible that in a society, an altruistic action is more beneficial than a purely egoistic one. The positivist’s elimination of these kinds of ethical arguments and theories, which are useful in building the foundations of societies, marginalizes the human mind and forces culture into a mindless, sterile world.

Losing intuition, emotion, metaphysics and ethics is a very negative consequence of strict logical positivism. Positivism may have usefulness as a scientific tool, but the loss of other intellectual arenas of thought become restrictive. Science can tell us things about the world as they are, but metaphysics and ethics tell us which questions to ask. Intuition provides the unconscious insight for discoveries and is an interesting area of study as to how science really occurs, as well as providing some guidance for human behavior.

Carried to extremes, logical positivism is a death toll to expansive human behavior, especially from a cultural perspective. The philosophy implies mechanical behavior and eliminates the imaginative quality that separates man from other species. Humans plan for tomorrow, imagine a future and choose ethical behavior that is not always instinctual. Without metaphysics, man’s existence would be extremely bland. Without ethics, man would have no basis for laws that create a civilized society.

Logical positivism is a welcome tool for exorcising superfluous superstition and emotionalism from modern thought in general and science in particular. However, in doing so, the philosophy continued toward an unsustainable extreme. Positivism and the verification principle are useful in picking out the most viable among a set of alternatives. The philosophy is further useful, as Kuhn has stated, as part of a joint verification-falsification process for a probability comparison of theories.

Logical positivism is one side of a sharp silver coin that provides an unequivocal separation of scientific knowledge from speculation, but it needs to be integrated as only one important part of a broad scientific or cultural philosophy.

From Unity to Unitarian (again)

Over the last year or more I have been going to classes at Unity of Dallas that are part of the Unity Spiritual Development Program. Completion of the SDP and a following Leadership Development Program are pre-requisites to obtaining a Licensed Unity Teacher Certification. Obtaining the LUT is required to be able to teach classes within Unity spiritual communities. I did not necessarily set out to become a LUT but I was very interested in the Metaphysical studies offered there and figured as long as I was going to spend the time I might as well get credit for it. The Metaphysics classes have been excellent and last year I also completed studies in Metaphysical Bible Interpretation and Abundance.

The next class on the list was The Story of Unity which traces the history of the Unity movement from the original founders throughout the early 20th century and beyond. The material is very straightforward and not nearly as stimulating as the Metaphysics classes have been. I attended one class last week and have been considering whether to follow through with it. This morning I believe the decision was made and the answer is No. In fact, I may abandon the quest for completing the SDP as well. Here's why.

Unity of Dallas offers lots of classes and discussions. The curriculum for the SDP and LDP and LUT are interesting, life affirming and connected with self-actualization ideas from other traditions and secular expressions of healthy minded living. Some of the topics, though, are all in the same vein as each other. The breadth is sometimes lacking. For example, there will not be specific curricular study on Transcendentalism (which is a strong contributor to New Thought as a whole), Buddhism, Hinduism or other philosophic strands and traditions. You might find these as supplemental classes or discussions on the menu as well as topics that might be considered "New Age" whatever that means. But pursuit of the LUT through the SDP and LDP will be more narrow than that.

I have attended several interesting and insightful discussions at the First Unitarian Church of Dallas over the last couple of years as well. This morning I decided to go to the Adult Forum lecture and discussion on Transcendentalism. The topics covered in various adult discussion groups there are very broad and include topics on world religions, philosophy, history, current affairs and comparative mythology. I believe I am gravitating toward that approach for a while. Perhaps I will return to the Unity discussions at a later date.

Abundance

Abundance is a consciousness rooted in faith in the absolute (metaphysical) realm that demonstrates positive contributions in the relative (physical) realm that results in a state of prosperity. Prosperity is not limited to the financial realm. Nor is financial demonstration necessarily one of the physical contributions that results from a particular individual expression.

Abundance is a way of being that is focused on gratitude, giving and creative expression. The absolute physical expression of prosperity by an individual will be consistent with the strengths of the core personality of the person. Advancements all arise from the creative mind that taps into the inner Self and finds expressions in our actions.

We experience lack when we are somehow working in opposition to spiritual law. Lack is not limited to financial resources. We can experience lack in terms of forgiveness, creativity, understanding, acceptance, initiative and especially love. We experience lack when we fail to demonstrate a giving consciousness. Giving more fully allows us to receive more fully and vice- versa.

We can think of affluence as experiencing an abundant flow. When we are in the flow, ideas come to us easier, relationships work better and manifestation of our inner desires occurs more frequently. We can create the foundation for affluence in our lives through many practices including, but not limited to: meditation, introspection, empathy, synergy, forgiveness and love.

The starting point for abundance is to accept responsibility for our own thoughts. We have the power to fuel or stop any thought that comes into our minds. We can encourage the constructive, positive ones and kill the destructive, negative ones. Thoughts are things that produce words which produce actions which produce results which produce consequences. We can act from cause rather than from effect. Working from cause is a much more efficient and effective way to live.

Can you realize what your life would be like if you could actualize your entire potential? Each of us has access to infinite imagination and potential. We can choose to open ourselves up to more of it or to close it down to a trickle or worse, complete blockage. We can always act as if it is impossible to fail or live in worry that we will not succeed. Every moment, every new action, and before that, every new idea is a new chance to accentuate the abundant instead of the limited.

Potential and Actual

The material world we live in is the world of science, senses, atoms, particles, forces and chemistry that can be measured and controlled to the degree we understand it through science and technology. It is also the world where our emotions are expressed through various relationships. It is a world of causes and effects that can be described and predicted to some degree as well.

The metaphysical world, if you choose to believe it. It is the ultimate cause of everything we see in the physical world. Even though there are billions of causes and effects that occur in the material world every nanosecond, the underlying ultimate cause (or first cause using Aristotle's language), is the metaphysical world. Some world views are completely materialistic and deny the existence of the metaphysical world.

If you are consistently scientific even into the realm of your personal life you might fall into this group. However, if you have any spiritual beliefs beyond that of naturalist or humanist style, you likely believe there is an underlying ground of being for the physical world. Differences of opinion about the nature of the metaphysical and its relationship to the physical occur once a belief in the metaphysical exists.

Maybe a few contrasts will help. In this list the left side represents the physical world and the right side the metaphysical:

• Relative - Absolute
• Actual - Potential
• Effect - Cause
• Sensory - Extra-sensory
• Objective - Subjective
• Changing - Constant
• Logical - Intuitive
• Approximate - Perfect
• Becoming - Ground of Being

In my interpretation, the metaphysical is not in the realm of the supernatural. Everything is One that includes what we'd call the metaphysical and the physical. We have our Source and Ground of Being in the metaphysical. We access the metaphysical through a consciousness that is aware of the Source. This awareness can be developed and increased if we have the will to do it. It is what allows us to truly discover who we are and to embark on a path of self-actualization and true expression and demonstration in the physical, or relative world.

Our consciousness can be raised to the extent that we have the potential to act from a position of a higher consciousness (sometimes called Christ, Buddha, Brahman, etc. depending on which religious tradition is used for language). The typical secular term for this is self-actualization. As we raise our consciousness we are able to respond to stimuli from the relative world in a way that is closer to the absolute. We are able to bring the potential of perfection from the absolute world into a more accurate instantiation in the physical world. This is the ideal, but not typical as most of us move up and down through lower and higher levels of awareness.

The metaphysical world is the place of pure potential. The physical world is the place of actuality. The potential of Energy/Light/Mind/Spirit needs the full experience of the Relative world and participates with all conscious entities in a dynamic co-creation of the material and psychic Universe. The depth of this bi-directional participation can be increased by seeking in order to find and knocking so that the door might be opened to us.

Modern Physics

Modern physics tells us about incredible worlds that exist in the infinitely small and the infinitely large. M-theory, String Theory, 4 fundamental forces, Standard Model, SuperGravity and Quantum Mechanics are just a small subset of theories that are used to describe the physical world. The closer we get to a Theory of Everything the more impossible the chance of a scientific proof of the theory becomes. At what point does Physics become Metaphysics?

That is a particularly interesting question to me, given that I am in the middle of a conscious study of Metaphysics for the next few weeks. Listening to some of the best Theoretical Physicists talk about Strings, (mem)Branes, Collisions, Dark Matter, Dark Energy and on and on I am struck by how closely it resembles historical Metaphysical explanations for the Universe. Not on specifics, but on the style of communication.

Physics today is grounded and driven by extremely sophisticated mathematics that ordinary laymen such as myself cannot understand. It requires significant scientific and mathematical background. So, the implications of the theories that are predicted by the math must be communicated in "stories". Stories tell us about the wonderful worlds that exist in parallel Universes, Multiverses (multiple universes) and strange particles that zip, collide, split, disintegrate and form new particles at the sub-atomic level.

A story is the fundamental component of Mythology. That's where we started. Metaphysics, starting with Platonism and descendents told Metaphysical stories held together with logic. Modern Physics seems to have advanced to the point where we are weaving extremely grand and complete theories of the physical world told in the form of Stories that are held together by Mathematics, or Formal Logic. So, modern physics is based on a concrete and mathematically provable Logic, where as Metaphysics is held together by pure logic.

No matter how far Modern Physics takes us, though, it is still focused on the Effect, whereas Metaphysics is focused on the Cause. At some point, Cause can get very close to Effect. However, it can probably never get there. Another aspect of Metaphysics is that some forms are held together by personal experience in Consciousness as well as Logic.

The stories of modern physics seem to be contemporary versions of myths that we can spin with some degree of foundation or grounding in very sophisticated Formal Logic. (Mathematics). However, the goal is to understand the Effect so thoroughly that the Cause will be revealed. Metaphysics has a different starting point, which is to understand the Cause through Logic, Intuition and Meditation so thoroughly that the Effect makes sense at the highest level so that the true Order of the Effect can be understood and influenced by the intuitive insights of Metaphysics.

Sorry if I've boiled this down to much to be understandable. Obviously, many hours of stimulating and clarifying conversation are possible from these concepts.

Metaphysics

I've been participating in a few metaphysics discussions recently. We are lucky enough to have an erudite facilitator who has extensive background in philosophy, theology and law. One of the best things about a metaphysics discussion is the spontaneity of the session. Since, by definition, metaphysics is not logically provable, imagination and intuition play a large role in the direction of questions and comments. The range of background from the people involved can span a wide area, leading to a need for integration of perspectives that can stimulate, irritate and enlighten.

What is metaphysics? It is the exploration of ultimate causes. Isn't that Physics? No. Physics is the study of effects. That is, if you believe in metaphysics at all. To get to first base in metaphysics, you have to experience a leap of faith at some point. In other words, you have to believe that the ultimate cause of the Universe is beyond the physical that we can sense and measure. Anything that we can sense and measure is the effect of the ultimate underlying cause, which is metaphysical. Even the most fundamental physical particle or force has an underlying cause that is beyond the logical or sensuous.

Those of a traditional religious orientation might say this is a theological discussion, in other words, metaphysics is synonymous with God. What is there to discuss? The Bible say it all, right? No need to speculate. Just read the text and listen to what your local priest, preacher or pastor tells you to believe. Done. That is possible, but to do that misses getting in touch with the ultimate energy and infinity that would have to be a fundamental property of an infinite and omnipotent power. Why put "God" in a box? If we name it, we define it, and we can only define things in our own image complete with our own limitations.

Some possible world views include:

• The physical is all there is - metaphysics is just imagination
• Both the physical and the metaphysical exist - they exist in separate realms and do not affect each other
• The physical is an illusion - the metaphysical is true reality - our goal is to escape the physical
• Both the physical and metaphysical are real - the physical is the relative world or the effect of the metaphysical - the metaphysical is the absolute world and causes the physical

I subscribe to the last world view. The connection between the two is consciousness. Consciousness exists along a spectrum ranging from fundamental physical particles to human intelligence. Human consciousness is the highest consciousness that we know exists. There may be higher levels of consciousness, but we do not have direct proof of that. We have two way communication with the metaphysical realm through our consciousness

That's a screenfull for a single blog. I'll try to elaborate other perceptions on this topic as the Spirit moves.