1. 1 Natural Philosophy Physics Class Notes September 7, 2011 What is Philosophy? What is “Physics”? What is Science? Kinds of Knowledge Levels of Knowledge Food for Thought I Philosophical Nihilism Nihilism: First False Conclusion Nihilism: Second False Conclusion Food for Thought II :P What is Philosophy? What is “Physics”? What is Science? Kinds of Knowledge Levels of Knowledge Food for Thought I Philosophical Nihilism Nihilism: First False Conclusion Nihilism: Second False Conclusion Food for Thought II :P

2. 2 What is Philosophy? Philosophy in the wide sense of the word is “love of wisdom” - - all wisdom, including what we now call “science.” The wide sense is the sense of the word found in ancient writers. In a more narrow sense, philosophy is the study of the first principles of various topics. The highest philosophy is “natural theology” -- consideration of God and what can be known about Him through the natural light of reason unaided by revelation.

3. 3 What is Physics? In the wide sense, physics (or physica) is the science of changeable being, or “mobile being.” In a more narrow sense, physics is an “empiriometric” science that brings sensorial data under organizational principles in order to predict outcomes. As an “empiriometric” science, it is limited to corporeal being This limitation reflects but simultaneously hides the underlying real being which is the cause of the phenomena it considers. empiriometric methodolgy is in contrast with ontological methodology, which considers being in its essence empiriometric methodology is a tool of physics in the wider sense, even if empiriometric scientists do not admit such.

4. 4 What is Science? Derived from the Latin verb scire -- to know -- (which is the source of the Latin noun scientia, knowledge) -- the nominal definition of “science” is “knowledge.” Forming a real definition of “science” is one aim of this course. Knowledge (science) has been called the unity of the knower and the known. When the knower knows a thing, he conforms himself to the thing in such a way that he “sees” it – with the eye of the intellect -- from the inside. This willing conformation to reality requires humility. Empiriometric science is limited to the knowledge of secondary causes and does not come to the deepest level of unity, i.e., grasping of the first causes of, in the case of physics, mobile being.

5. 5 Kinds of Knowledge Proper knowledge -- certain knowledge obtained by the knower’s correct application of reason and experience. Improper knowledge -- generic belief based on trust in someone other than the knower himself. Infra-scientific knowledge -- knowledge based on every-day experience which has not been philosophically scrutinized.

6. 6 Levels of Knowledge As a knower begins from experience and builds conclusions, the conclusions are then used to derive other conclusions, and so on. This layering takes place with both proper and improper knowledge

7. 7 Food for Thought What type of knowledge do you personally have concerning the earth’s movement around the sun? With which “knowledge” are you more unified? That the earth is round or that there is a computer screen before you at this very moment? Can you name other scientific “facts” that are, for most people, improper knowledge rather than proper knowledge? When is improper knowledge “blind” faith? Defend or attack the following statement: For most knowers, faith in the movement of the heavenly bodies after Copernicus, more specifically after Galileo, is more blind than was faith in such movement under the Ptolemic system.

8. 8 Philosophical Nihilsm - One Example of Science’s Influence on Culture Nihilism - from the Latin nihil, meaning “nothing.” According to atomic theory, matter is made up of “mostly nothing” (the space between the atom’s nucleus and the outer orbit of its electron(s). Our senses perceive matter as solid, not as being composed of “mostly nothing.” Therefore, members of our culture often incorrectly reason that: Our senses cannot be trusted. The material universe, including human bodies, is unimportant.

9. 9 Examining Nihilism’s First False Conclusion, i.e. that sensory data are not trustworthy. We make use of sensory data in forming our conclusion that matter is “mostly nothing.” If we then conclude (utilizing the chain of reasoning mentioned earlier in “layers of knowledge”) that our sense perception [that matter not “mostly nothing”] is not trustworthy, neither can we trust the sensory data telling us that matter is “mostly nothing.” We have not justification for saying that the senses are trustworthy in the former but not in the latter. The very activity of science depends on sensory data; to nullify it is to destroy science in the name of science.

10. 10 Examining Nihilism’s Second False Conclusion, i.e., that the universe is unimportant (and being is meaningless.) Science constantly affirms that the universe is knowable. The ability to comprehend so many phenomena is evidence that the knower and the known can achieve a unity. That, as Aristotle said, “men by nature want to know” is evidence that knowing is important. The false conclusions of nihilism (as based on the “nothingness” of the atom) result from limiting knowledge to the empiriometrical level, i.e. not penetrating the essence of being itself with an ontological approach.

11. 11 More Food for Thought What other scientific commonplaces (“facts”) have had a profound effect on our culture’s morale and morals? What kind of experiment might you devise to move your improper knowledge of heliocentrism toward (or all the way to) proper knowledge? What was so utterly profound about the Galileo case?