On sects like cladism and particle physics, and the irony of cladism

Sects like cladism (cladistics) and particle physics are not science, but rather kinds of culture resting on some mendacity. If you accept it, then you’re in, but if not, then you’re out. Their aim is not to reveal causality, as science’s is, but rather more private like earning money, making career and raise their status. In the specific cases of cladism (cladistics) and particle physics, they do it under the disguise of science, ie, using scientific manners.

Fact is, however, that both cladism’s “true tree of life” and particle physic’s “Higgs particle” are inconsistent, actually paradoxically contradictory. It means that none of them can be found (per definition). The property of being impossible to find do they indeed share with the “true causality” of science, but the difference is that the “true causality” just is ambiguous, ie, can ultimately be expressed in two different ways. Science is thus not contradictory, like sects like cladism and particle physics are, but just ambiguous. Science is thus ultimately just an aim to improve our models of causality, whereas the aims of sects like cladism and particle physics are mendacities. It is possible to improve our models of causality, but it is not possible to find mendacities like “the true tree of life” or “Higgs particle”.

The 10 000 dollar-question is if it is possible to improve models towards a mendacity. In the case of “the Higgs particle”, the answer is clearly no. We can’t come closer to finding this impossible particle. In the case of “the true tree of life”, the answer is more complicated. If there had been just one mendacity, ie, just one void “true tree of life”, then it would have been possible to improve models towards it, but the problem is that there are many void “true tree of life”, meaning that this search is bound to bifurcate into different directions forever. This “improvement” is thus in practice actually a diversification of the same kind as the process it models, that is, evolution. Cladism does thus actually mimic the process is aims to model – it diversifies continuously.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s