The Limits of Scientific Knowledge

in #philosophy6 years ago (edited)

Could you know everything? No, there is too much to know in the universe. We can know some things, quit a lot too, but not be the person to have all the answers all the time. Some things we just don't know.

We are existing in one part of the universe, some locality, with subsets of knowledge that are all part of the larger system we call the universe. If we use our eyes, ears, or other sensory inputs, or other technological instruments that detect visual, auditory or other signals to extend our ability to infer what is in reality, we are limited to what is around us.


Source

What we can know is restricted to what is being observed or detected. In addition, we can also fail to remember knowledge (memory, retrodiction), and we can also fail to predict what we are looking for to detect, as well as limits to the control we can exert during our observations. If we aren't looking for it, we might not even notice it. Technology that is designed to look for somethings we predict, won't be looking for other things we didn't predict and design it to look for.

Humans are like devices too, with the same limits in our cognitive heuristics (biases) and shortcuts. The other day I was looking for measuring spoons, but they weren't where they were supposed to be. I couldn't see them. I looked around. Finally I saw them hanging in front of my cutting board near the spice rack. I was cutting up veggies the whole time, but I couldn't see them. I didn't predict they were there. I predicted they were somewhere else, so I didn't see them even though they were in my visual range.

According to some new mathematical proof by David Wolpert, no two free will beings could co-exist to know everything in the universe. There may or may not be a single being in some universe (our own or another in the alleged multiverse) that knows everything that can be known, but only one could exist he says. He calls this "the monotheism theorem", in that there can only be one, be it a god or not, but not more than one god.

To explain it, suppose there are free will beings with unlimited computational abilities called Bob and Alice. They can try to infer and predict what another is thinking or not thinking. Each person at different moments in time is also a distinct inference device. The example used relates to the Cretan liar's paradox of saying "all Cretans are liars" when said by a Cretan. It can also be stated as "everything I say is a lie". So is what I said true or false?

Here is the example used in the paper to demonstrate the limits of what can be known:

The time t1 is less than t2, which in turn is less than noon. V is the set of all time-t2 universes where Bob is thinking the answer “yes” in response to the t1 question Bob heard — whatever that question was. W is the set of all time-t2 universes where Alice is thinking the answer “yes” in response to the t1 question Alice heard — whatever that question was. V′ is V evolved forward to noon, and W′ is W evolved forward to noon. At t1, we ask Bob, “will the universe be in W′ at noon?” (in other words, “Was Alice thinking ‘yes’ at t2?”). At that time we also ask Alice, “will the universe be outside of V′ at noon?” (in other words, “Was Bob not thinking ‘yes’ at t2?”). It is impossible for both Bob and Alice to answer correctly, no matter what their computational capabilities are, what the laws of the universe are, etc.

It's a play on the Cretans paradox, where you can't know the future thinking answer of another being based on a past answer that hasn't happened yet. If Bob was not thinking yes, then Alice answers yes, but that means Bob can't answer yes himself to the prediction of her future answer, because if he does answer yes then that means Alice's answer is no.

The theorem also says that if a deity can know everything at one time/moment, then they can only know that once, and not more than once. This "deism theorem" means that a deity could know everything at the beginning of the universe for example, but only then and not again. At least that's how the theory is presented.

If the absolute certainty of an answer is changed to the probability of an answer, then things change for what we can know. For example, the Cretans statement could be phrased as "the probability that a Cretan is a liar is greater than x percent?" Now it's not impossible to answer because it's based in probability. No longer is it all Cretans are liars, said by a Cretan, but that 99% of Cretans are liars for example, means that the Cretan saying it could be telling the truth in that case. Applied to the monotheism theorem, knowing one thing with greater certainty might not limit the ability of knowing another thing.


References:


Thank you for your time and attention. Peace.


If you appreciate and value the content, please consider: Upvoting, Sharing or Reblogging below.
Follow me for more content to come!


My goal is to share knowledge, truth and moral understanding in order to help change the world for the better. If you appreciate and value what I do, please consider supporting me as a Steem Witness by voting for me at the bottom of the Witness page; or just click on the upvote button if I am in the top 50.

Sort:  

science is just the past experiences, base from the peoples observations but science help us to think where we came from and what could possibly our future be. But the limit to it is depend on human perception and levels of understanding in nature.

I think general human knowledge is constantly increasing, but you are right, we are limited by several factors, including location, education, and life experience. The more I learn in life, the more I realize that I know almost nothing.
I do think this will change over time though as technology constantly gets better and were start enhancing our genetics with computer chips and other robotic parts. With the rise of AI I think we will find a way to tap into a limitless resource

Enhancing our genetics with computer chips? Why? Seems like an ego-trip of not wanting to accept not knowing everything, with limits to being human. The end of humanity begins when we are so desperate to no longer be human.

Why? What a silly question you ask. Think of the human ego for a few seconds and you will know why. Why do wars start? Why do people cheat on their spouses, why do we steal? All of these when broken down are to satisfy our human ego. To be human is to constantly be pursuing more knowledge and power

No this is impossible. The more Intelligence you create the more doors you will open up. The more the external reality will take millions of new shapes. There is no way you will ever be able to compute all that because the more you try the more shapes it will take. You will not win against the creator by trying to figure stuff out using logic.

If you don't know, you don't know how much is you don't know but if you know a great deal you know how much there is you don't know. I was thought in my phylosophy class. Nice one sir

I really like what you are doing with this blog. You deserve to be voted as a witness. I have learnt alot from your great work. Great job

Thank you.

Very well written! Thanks for sharing your knowledge!

Could you know everything? No, there is too much to know in the universe.

Not for the moment, no. But in the future we might end up finding ways to increase our capacity to store knowledge.

What we can know is restricted to what is being observed or detected

Indeed, this is another way of saying that perception and reality can be kind of the same.

We don't need to store knowledge when we have something called the Internet. All the knowledge is being stored in the cloud already. But knowledge is not the same as knowing. And just as the author said there is too much to know.

Well, perception isn't reality. Perception is the subjective reality. The goal should be to align our perceptions (map) with objective reality (territory).

Excellent proof of universal unanimity!

However, it depends on time, which isn't what we think it is.

"...a deity could know everything at the beginning of the universe for example, but only then and not again."

There is no again. There is only now, to entities outside/transcending spacetime, as far as we can comprehend it.

Thanks!

Yes there is an again, because I can stand on one leg now, and plan on doing it 1 minute from now, which would mean I'm doing it again. Mistakes can be repeated, doing things again and again.

We perceive time as separate from space, while spacetime is one thing. While we are infinitesimally minute beings, and our perceptions and experiences limited by our scope, the actuality of things, as you point out, isn't encompassed by our perceptions. What is, is far vaster and much more than we can know.

That doesn't mean that all beings are as limited as are we, and the perception of time by a being that transcended spacetime would not be limited to our perspective from within it. Such a being would not know an arrow of time; a string of instances of 'now', as do we. We can perceive an again, because we cannot perceive an omnitemporal now. This is not due to the nature of spacetime, but due to our limitations.

A blind cave fish cannot perceive light, but light exists nonetheless. Just so our perception of the passage of time.

Studying, studying, studying ....- it's never too late or better late than never ...

This is a very informative post. In life is very true with what you convey in this post. Humans have the same brain but different ways of thinking. Furthermore, more challenges and experiences will make us more aware in using comparison and logic of thinking to find answers to every problem. Hopefully my comments in accordance with your post. :)

Yup, good way of saying it. Thanks for the feedback.

Most of the questions thrown really cant be answered by science, didnt even know there existed theories like the deism theorem which I dont really believe holds true but would like to modify that they know possible outcomes of the future based on the events put in play be choice

Coin Marketplace

STEEM 0.35
TRX 0.12
JST 0.040
BTC 71288.26
ETH 3580.30
USDT 1.00
SBD 4.77