| HOME PAGE | Research |
1. Logistic development
Logistic development (see diagram and for example my text Sociological theory) can explain a difference between a qualitative change and quantitative change. It
shows that each kind of so called qualitative change, like for example liquefaction of gas, is just some form
of quantitative change. Marxists are using conception of change where quantitative changes transform to
qualitative change. But this idea is containing fundamental mistake that there is a difference between qualitative and quantitative change.What I would like to emphasize is each so called qualitative change, for example the transition of water into ice, or steam into water, is actually a cumulative quantitative change; that is, a quantitative change taking place quickly over a short period of time. So there are no qualitative changes, only quantitative ones (the above part of this paragraph is from year 2008).
The second law of Marx's dialectics is the law of the transformation of quantity into quality. If, for example, we gradually heat water by one degree, at some point it will turn into steam, and this is a qualitative, not quantitative, change. As my analysis shows, this law is incorrect. In fact, this transformation of water into steam is also a quantitative change, only a very rapid one, occurring suddenly through a quantitative leap. Let's look again at diagram 1 (the above part of this paragraph is from year 2025). 2.
2. My Theory of Science
A. Comte's improved theory of science. Whole of sciences consists of theoretical and applied knowledge. Theoretical knowledge divide on general as physics or biology and detailed such as botany, zoology or mineralogy. Main fields mathematics, astronomy, physics, chemistry,
biology, sociology and psychology it is possible to order according to decrescent range of research and
complicatedness of theoretical tools what is connected with growing complexity of investigated
phenomenones. Following sciences are based on previous, for example to methodically capture chemistry, we must imply acquaintance of physics, because all chemical phenomena are more complicated than physical phenomena, are also from them dependent.
The second diagram above shows that chemistry can also be the foundation of physics. In fact, among other things, basic models, sciences can mutually draw on neighboring sciences. Thus, for example, sociology can draw models from both psychology and biology, biology can draw models from both sociology and chemistry, and so on.
3. To resolve the age old dispute between idealism, realism, and materialism, we should probably assume the contribution of two components. In a 50/50 ratio, or with a predominance of one or the other. It seems best to adopt the golden ratio in this case. That is, a division of 0.62 of one component and 0.38 of the other. Since things and phenomena should persist and not be completely or partially unstable, we should assume a predominance of the material and real components. Thus, we will have a contribution of 0.62 of the material and real components and 0.32 of the idealistic components. Let me decribe this positions as ideorealism and ideomaterialism.
4. I assume that there is a higher power, a Father who is the guardian of the cosmos. Marian sanctuaries are unnecessary and their design is based on false premises. Instead, sanctuaries of the Father of cosmos should be built, with ultramodern architecture.
5. Falsification is a deductive elimination scheme. Popper's Falsificationism seems to be wrong because the theory tests always strive to confirm it or confirmation and not refute it. So this concept is not unreliable with the actual way science is practiced. From the point of view of scientific research, striving to refute the theory seems to be a kind of nonsense and is something illogical.For example, General Relativity found confirmation in the Mercury orbit anomalies that Newton's theory could not explain. This confirmation is treated as proof of the validity of the theory. Of course, you can give more examples.
Knowledge is inherently uncertain, as the ancient skeptics have already demonstrated. Therefore, science must use invalid inferences. Induction inferences is one of the basic types of inference of empirical sciences. These are uncertain inferences. Deductive inferences belong to the field of formal sciences such as mathematics and logic. On the basis of empirical science, the use of deduction is not meaningfully possible. By the way, ancient skeptics have also undermined the credibility of the deduction. Popper's falsificationism is a delusion of deductive certainty. We use scientific theories, but please remember that they are subject to uncertainty and you may raise some doubts about them. Although confirmation does not guarantee logical certainty, it increases the probability of validity and increases the chances that a given theory is correct. 6. Solipsism assumes that there is only me, and all reality along with other subjects is only my imagination. Solipsism is more consistent than the positions of Bishop Berkeley. Berkeley assumes that observable things and phenomena are only systems of impressions, because only impressions are directly accessible to us, and assuming the existence of non mental matter is unauthorized speculation. Independence and order as well as existence beyond the perception of things and phenomena observed Berkeley justifies that they are perceived by God.
Berkeley accepts the existence of other subjects, which seems unjustified, a more consistent position is solipsism, which in some formulation may formulate the thesis that the things and phenomena observed are only systems of my private impressions, including other subjects. So since we accept the existence of other subjects, then on this basis we have the full right to accept existence beyond the mental reality. This argument is the strongest argument against Berkeley's theory, let me call it an argument from solipsism. 7. Mainly rubbish fills present physics, for example - cosmical branes giving beginning to big bang and creating other universes, multidimensionality, strings existing in 10 dimensions, string theory, microbubbles, hyperspace and so on. They are products of exuberant speculation completely detached from reality. We need to get out of the nonsense of current physics. 8. Induction would provide knowledge about the future, as would all scientific prediction. However, any transfer of the past to the future is contradictory, because the future does not yet exist and is therefore non-empirical, unverifiable. Therefore, there is no reasoning that gives some knowledge, because 1. there cannot be knowledge about what is not empirical 2. there cannot be knowledge about what does not yet exist, therefore knowledge by its very nature is uncertain and if it was certain it would have to be contradictory. Still different, if certain knowledge is such knowledge that leads to the future, it can be seen that it is impossible because the future does not yet exist. Therefore, no reasoning about facts can be certain. We can't even know what will happen in a few seconds because the future does not yet exists. 11. Are there general abstract ideas? Do they exist in any separate world or reality? Well, the question of whether there is a world of ideas can be answered in the affirmative or negative if we answer the question whether there are general abstract ideas at all. The answer to this question is that these ideas do not exist. General abstract ideas are contradictory, for example, the idea of a tree must combine the properties of large and small trees, with serrated, round, coniferous leaves and so on. 12. For philosophy not questions are important but answers. Philosophy has not to pose, to multiply questions and leave it unanswered. What allegedly has to be its characteristic attribute. As same as science has not to pose questions and leave it unanswered. A function of philosophy, as same as of science is both to pose as and to give answers. But second are much more precious then first. 13. The mind-body problem essentially boils down to another problem, the mind-bodies problem. Due to the existence of subtle bodies. Thus, in the problem under consideration, we are dealing not with one body but with many; it is therefore a mind-bodies problem. The mind is reduced in 0,62 to these bodies and in 0,32 is something independent. It is a golden ratio division. 14. The development of science cannot overtake the moral development of society, an example of such a phenomenon is the release of atomic energy (under the pressure of Hitler's actions), this example should be a warning to future researchers to carefully present certain results, and hide some facts as necessary. Consider how you can make use of your concepts and the scale of the threat. 15. Marxism's errors consist in the fact that 1. the final development is the middle class, not the working class 2. A process of qualitative transition is not necessarily and usually not revolutionary. Even a demographic boom with a growth rate of 2% per year is not revolutionary but evolutionary. Against the background of previous development, it seems very fast, but only because that one was very slow. Therefore, if changes are needed, they should be endeavor gradually, though dynamically reaching them finally 3. Any so called qualitative change - for example, the transition of water into ice, or steam into water - is actually a cumulative quantitative change; that is, a quantitative change taking place quickly over a short period of time. 16. Plato proposed an involutionary model of social development based on gradual decline and degeneration. Which exactly contradicts evidently occurring social evolution and the emergence of an increasingly perfect system. Popper, in opposing historicism, did not take into account the theory of Spencer, where the development is shown so clearly that only a complete fool can deny it, it probably resulted from his ignorance. 17. Most metaphysics is irrelevant because it uses a not-so-precise, accurate, clear language. With such formalization of physics and chemistry, an informal study of reality should be possible, one should only indicate what it should look like, it should be a scientific philosophy, clear and linguistic precise. Examples include the Gorgias system, the Democritus system and the Berkeley system, others include philosophy closely related to empirical sciences, theory of science or philosophy explicitly referring to empirical sciences. 18. Characteristics of extended theory of evolution of Herbert Spencer, presents as follows - process of evolution is an integration of matter, whereat matter passes from a state of undefined, incoherent homogeneity, simplicities, primordialities, physicalnesses, unformed, amorphisms, undimensional, uniformity, homomorphism to a definite, coherent heterogenicity, complexities, modernities, culture, formation, construction, dimensionality, variousness, polymorphism. This seizure of process of evolution has a polycomplex character. 19. Astrology is the same what a divination from scattered animal bones - so from an aleatorily obtained configuration, function of bones fulfil planets; "accuracy" comes from inaccuracy of used categories which each separately can contain any property or notion. Of course, information value of such "method" must be equal zero. 20. Against claims of such philosophers as Popper atomism does not descend from metaphysical speculations. Democritus took over this view from Hindus during his travels in the east, conception of atoms existed there at the very latest about VIII century BC, and was based on paranormal perceptions of yogis - a source could be only paranormal activity, but for sure not philosophical speculation, in Europe spherical atoms appeared not before XIX century AD. 21. The basic errors of typical philosophy are rationalism and turbidity. For example, Kant seems to build a system that does not respect the principles of empiricism, and this alone means that its concept must be wrong at its very root. In addition, the writings of for example Plato, Aristotle, Hegel, Kant, Heidegger seem unbearably cloudy.
As for Plato's concept, the world of ideal forms probably exists, but it will not be a world of abstract ideas or numbers. These are ideal forms (idealiths) of living and intelligent organisms, plants, animals and people. As well as perhaps boulders. Plato's direction of thought may have been right, but the conclusions he drew do not correspond to reality. The world of these ideal forms is above spacetime. (year 2020) 22. I know from my own research experience that the most important concept for the entire theory of science is the process of scientific discovery. The physical model of the psychological process of discovery is the strike of lightning. Discovery is a mental flash, the manifestation of a higher intellectual process. Larger discoveries are usually a manifestation of a scientist's genius. Certain competences in the form of the knowledge accumulated by the scientist are required to be discovered.
Another concept is the concept of mystery - it is a key concept for the entire cognitive process and seems to occupy a place above the rational mind, similarly magical practices properly cleansed of the burden of superstitions occupy a place above the rational mind. Mystery is everywhere. A mystery can move from the level above reason to the area of discovery and the level of reason. What hides in darkness and mystery can sometimes come to light and discovery. This darkness can be illuminated by a flash of discovery. Thus, we can distinguish two most important cognitive orders, the order of mystery and the order of discovery.
So, for cogniton there are two highest and most important types, the type of mystery and the type of discovery (darkness and light). However, the mystery type is more basic. 23. Skeptics claimed that there is no sensual cognition - ten tropes of Aenesidemus, for example, the tower looks round from a distance and looks polygonal up close, and since there is no sensory cognition, there is actually no knowledge at all. And after Gorgias, the Skeptics claimed that since there is nothing, there is also no knowledge. The foundation of ancient skepticism was the theory of the sophist Gorgias. Thus, for example through Aenesidemus's ten tropes, the theory of nothingness speaks. Gregory Podgorniak, Poland
about the author, My name is Gregory Podgorniak (brn. 01.1977, Szczecinek, West Pomerania, Poland). I am working on field of natural as well as social sciences. During philosophical studies at Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznan (1996-1999) I was actively act in student scientific organisation, got a scientific scholarship, and one from my articles titled Circulus vitiosus and fourfold petitio principii in the system
of Descartes was published in Humanistic Drafts of Publishing House of Humaniora Foundation in Poznan, no. 6, 1998. Unfortunately certain fate events made impossible to me continuing studies to master's and later doctor's degree. Thence I was forced to be content only with a title of bachelor.Thanks to deep and penetrating researchings I was able to establish indisputably some number of my past incarnations reaching of ancient period, these data are certain, these incarnations are: Auguste Comte (1798-1857) French philosopher and sociologist, Edme Mariotte (1620-1684) French physicist and meteorologist, Aenesidemus (1 st century BC) Greek sceptical philosopher, Arcesilaus (315-241 BC) Greek sceptical philosopher, Gorgias (485-380 BC) Greek sophist. email contact: podgorniakgre@gmail.com see also my text: How to increase your IQ level ? How to improve your IQ ? map of my research
