Perception is not the ultimate guide for knowledge but as Gallileo captured the actual and empirical, not necessarily the real, similar concerns arise.
In general, the repercussions of Reduction arise because what is actual, i.e final instantiation of underlining process, is not all the story. Further omissions come from the empirical approach since sense means are not always valid projectors of the actual.
Gallilean approach has yielded a framework that empowered our comprehension & ability to define/describe phenomena in the realm of the actual& empirical. His treatise should not be considered more than this i.e descrining the nature of the real and its dynamics.
The reduction of change to motion has been noted but little has been argued about its shortfalls in epistemic practice. This reduction is part of the reduction of the real to the actual since it omits any need to refer to the real to make its claims functional. It also removes philosophical or anthropocentric notions of growth and ultimate ends which is good in one sense but in a pure "reductionist shortfalls" point of view is still a problem dimain restriction.
The description of motion with mathematics is another point neglected. Motion can be described qualitatively or conceptual but such a framework has not been devised.
No, the implication of Galileo's reductionism is that only measurable quantities are worth noting, thus marginalising all the important qualoitative experiences that make life worthwhile. This approach is also resposible for the fact that there is not satisfactory scientific explanation for consciousness! Have a look at:
Presentation Consciousness, Materialism and Spirituality: In Praise of Me...
Goff, P. (2019). Galileo's Error: Foundations for a New Science of Consciousness. London: Rider.
Plenty food for thought here. Best wishes for all the work!
Terry
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Mathematics