Why scientists should be open-minded to pseudo-claims and taboo subjects.
Ironically, the Age of Awakening or the Age of Aquarius coincides with talks of the mind-woke virus and identity politics. Maybe it is meant to be that way for every background needs a foreground, and every hero a villain. Nature’s dualistic nature permeated the natural world in our minds, but quantum physics caused a paradigm shift in the so-called dichotomous world.
In an era where traditional computers operate using the binary system of 0s and 1s, quantum physics introduced a revolutionary concept: superposition. Unlike classical bits (0 or 1), qubits can exist in a superposition, representing 0 and 1 simultaneously. This allows quantum computers to process a vast number of possibilities at once.
This represents a state that exists between or beyond the dualistic extremes, much like the “grey area” or middle that transcends the opposites of yin and yang, mind and body. In this sense, it embodies a formless, nondualistic reality.
This is a concept Deepak Chopra has tried to bridge with spirituality and quantum physics. Not without pushback or criticism because science requires rigorous investigation, empiricism, and a consensus rightfully so.
Historically, traditions like the Catholic church were close-minded, while scientists were open-minded. Heretics and scientists were prosecuted or imprisoned for their beliefs if they contradicted the religious dogma of the time. Galileo Galilei and Giordano Bruno are two examples of famous figures who challenged conventional wisdom.
Scientific revolutions have often coincided with periods of spiritual exploration and renewed interest in mystical or occult pursuits and practices. Some of history’s greatest minds, like Isaac Newton, not only advanced scientific understanding but also explored unconventional and taboo subjects, such as alchemy.
The boundaries between science and pseudoscience can shift over time, as social, cultural, and empirical factors influence how ideas are perceived. For example, astrology and alchemy regressed and became a pseudoscience. Alchemy became chemistry, and astrology was superseded by astronomy. Meanwhile, natural philosophy evolved into what is now the field of physics.
Of course, claims whether unscientific or not, or behind an authoritative label like science or religion must be challenged in order for harmful pseudoscience like eugenics not to grow into a perverted pseudo-ideology to justify the dehumanization of certain ethical groups or an unethical slaughter like the German Nazi Party committed. Even when pseudo-science is backed up by some empirical truths, they must remain ethical and injected with a healthy dose of skepticism.
The stagnation in fields like physics might call for an ethical and open-minded revival of certain metaphysical or unconventional ideas to inspire scientists’ imaginations and drive the field forward. A suggestion worth contemplating.
Social Scholarly 