Imagine that you live on an island, alone.
Your island consists of a pile of books which contain the ideas that make up your worldview. From time to time you use a book as a raft to visit surrounding islands, some near and some far away, some identical to your own and some that are very strange. All these other islands also have only one occupant. You observe that most islands have very few books in common with your home island. You experience great joy as you explore new islands and host visitors to yours.
These thoughts were inspired while thinking about the Ajijic Book Club and simultaneously reading The Island of Knowledge: The Limits of Science and the Search for Meaning by Marcelo Gleiser.
Marcelo Gleiser summarizes his book as follows:
Because much of Nature remains hidden from us, our view of the world is based only on the fraction of reality that we can measure and analyze… But as I will argue in this book, other parts will remain hidden, unknowables that are unavoidable, even if what is unknowable in one age may not be in the next one. We strive toward knowledge, always more knowledge, but must understand that we are, and will remain, surrounded by mystery.
In science class during my high school years in the 1960s I was taught a certain view of reality. That description of reality changed dramatically in subsequent decades at a seemingly ever accelerating pace. From time to time I read a few books which gave me glimpses of new and better descriptions of reality. But the aggregate of all human knowledge grew much faster than my ability to keep pace. On the one hand I knew much more than I ever did as a high school student. But on the other hand I knew less and less compared to the amount of knowledge available.
Gleiser documents how technological advancements led to new knowledge which necessitated new worldviews.
The telescope owes its fame to Galileo and his tireless efforts to promote it as a new way of doing astronomy, the tool that would precipitate a new world order.
This concept is easy to understand as we look back at the scientific revolution of the 17th century. But Gleiser applies the idea to developments up to the present day. He then makes us confront the startling idea that similar revolutions may still await us. The physics of Isaac Newton was extended by the physics of Albert Einstein which in turn was superseded by the physics of Max Planck, Niels Bohr, Werner Heisenberg and others. What reason do we have to believe that today we are near the end of this progression?
A frequently overused and misused word we often see today is the word illusion. A book needs to be written bringing clarity to what is real and what is not real. Is the present real?
The “present”— the sum total of the sensorial input we say is happening “now”— is nothing but a convincing illusion…the present exists because our brain blurs reality… Each one of us is an island of perception… “Now” is not only a cognitive illusion but also a mathematical trick, related to how we define space and time quantitatively.
Each one of us, each member of the Ajijic Book Club, lives in our own reality created by what we believe and what we know. Caution is advised as we explore each other's islands. Is my island somehow real while yours is an illusion?
As we move on to modern cosmology, things get even more interesting… an absolute limitation on how much we can know of the physical world… At some point we must hit a brick wall…
It is not hard to come to realization that there are very real limits to what I personally know. It is not hard to come to the realization that the knowledge of every human being is inevitably incomplete. But can there be a limit to the aggregate of human knowledge? Will we forever be confronted with unanswered questions, unanswerable questions? This possibility may influence some to stay close to their own comfortable island. Others may travel to distant islands, getting lost and never again finding their way home.
Gleiser explores the edge of new knowledge today and the new questions which arise. What is dark energy? What will our universe be like in one or two trillion years? Are there different kinds of infinities? What is smaller than the smallest known particle at this time? Can there ever be a theory of everything? Gleiser lives on a strange island but one I wish I were better equipped to explore.
Some of the ideas of Marcelo Gleiser may generate ripples that reach the shores of other islands of knowledge. Some may cause waves. Some may be tsunamis that threaten to permanently change the landscape of islands that are built on weak foundations.
Since what exists defines physical reality, the new physics suggested that reality could be immaterial.
Healthy science needs a combination of humility and hope: humility to accept the extent of our ignorance and hope that new discoveries will illuminate the current darkness. However, when we are at the edge of knowledge and data is not forthcoming, well-grounded speculation is the only strategy at our disposal. Without imagination science stagnates.
Unless you are intellectually numb, you can’t escape the awe-inspiring feeling that the essence of reality is unknowable.
My personal belief about the nature of ultimate reality is easy to express. I do not know. Consequently, I am open explore the idea that ultimate reality may be immaterial and open to the possibility that it may not ever be possible to know for certain. Humility, hope, speculation and imagination are all words that resonate with me.
Disagreement begins and tempers flare when we ask how far into our reality we can push the strangeness.
Even in a book club with an exclusive focus on nonfiction, some books, some ideas and some of their adherents may seem very strange to others. Some ideas may conflict in fundamental ways that are beyond reconciliation. When conflicting ideas are dogmatically asserted tempers may indeed flare. So be it. Withdrawal to an isolated island of knowledge is not conducive to a vibrant nonfiction book club.
The following closing words from Marcelo Gleiser inspire me:
We probe Nature the best way we can, with our tools and intuition, with our models and approximations, with our imaginative descriptions, metaphors, and imagery. The view of science I presented here is a view of open-ended pursuit, not of envisioned ends. As we learn more about the world, confronting theories with data, probing deeper and further, we realize that the answers we gather are steps that go mostly forward but sometimes back: the Island of Knowledge grows and sometimes shrinks, as we learn something new about the Universe or take something back. We see ever more clearly but never clearly enough.
Further readings:
A book review by Maria Popova on her excellent website brainpickings:
https://www.brainpickings.org/2015/02/02/the-island-of-knowledge-marcelo-gleiser/
The Island of Knowledge: How to Live with Mystery in a Culture Obsessed with Certainty and Definitive Answers
And yet if there is one common denominator across the entire history of human culture, it is the insatiable hunger to know the unknowable — that is, to know everything, and to know it with certainty, which is itself the enemy of the human spirit.
A book review by Adam Frank on the excellent npr website 13.7 cosmos & culture:
http://www.npr.org/sections/13.7/2014/06/18/322566962/science-defines-the-shores-of-our-ignorance
Science Defines The Shores Of Our Ignorance
Ultimately Marcelo is answering the challenge of Scientism — the idea that science is the one-and-only route to true knowledge.
A book review by John G. Messerly on a transhumanist website:
Review of Marcelo Gleiser’s, The Island of Knowledge: The Limits of Science and the Search for Meaning
Gleiser’s point here is uncontroversial–similar desires motivate creation myths and scientific cosmology. And for popularity, religious myths win hands down. But for those not attracted to religious answers Gleiser’s suggestion is insightful.
I wrote the above book report in November, 2016.
I wish I had more time to follow the work of Marcelo Gleiser as I am interested in his approach to spirituality. He is an atheist that I admire. Below are some links to his work.
Institute for Cross-Disciplinary Engagement (ICE)
Marcelo Gleiser Awarded 2019 Templeton Prize
Atheism Is Inconsistent with the Scientific Method, Prizewinning Physicist Says
In conversation, the 2019 Templeton Prize winner does not pull punches on the limits of science, the value of humility and the irrationality of nonbelief