{"id":665,"date":"2017-12-31T20:03:20","date_gmt":"2017-12-31T20:03:20","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/joshmitteldorf.peachpuff-wolverine-566518.hostingersite.com\/?p=665"},"modified":"2018-01-01T20:32:30","modified_gmt":"2018-01-01T20:32:30","slug":"the-other-half-of-science","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/scienceblog.com\/joshmitteldorf\/2017\/12\/31\/the-other-half-of-science\/","title":{"rendered":"The Other Half of Science"},"content":{"rendered":"

This time each year, I take the liberty of posting something more speculative and personal. \u00a0In this essay, I propose that everything we consider the \u201cscientific world-view\u201d is only half the story, and that science must expand its foundations if it aspires to \u00a0be a complete account of reality. \u00a0<\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

A reductionist approach to science has become so ubiquitous that many scientists find it difficult to imagine that science can be done in any other way. \u00a0Interactions among elemetary particles are the ultimate explanation, the only final cause. \u00a0Biology can be reduced to chemistry. \u00a0Chemistry is the science of large numbers of atoms, interacting according to the laws of quantum physics. <\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

But reductionism is only a habit of the way we do science. \u00a0It is logically possible that there are global laws, interconnections, entanglements; and that these are discoverable by investigation that is rigorously scientific .\u00a0 Teleology is commonly dismissed as \u201cunscientific\u201d, but it is precisely teleology that we may need to explain a host of diverse findings that conventional science has swept beneath the carpet.<\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

Camille Flammarion 1888 copy of 16th Century woodcut. Bettman Archive calls it “Man Looking into Outer Space” Original artist unknown.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n
\n

One of my oldest friends is a professor of computer science at a great mid-western university. \u00a0An Israeli-American, Uri is descended on his mother\u2019s side from an ancient line of Kabbalist mystics, but his philosophy is strictly materialist. \u00a0He believes that <\/span>\u201cthe mind is what the brain does\u201d<\/span><\/a>, that the brain is a computer, and that electronic computers can be programmed to do anything that our brains can do. \u00a0Like a great majority of computer scientists, he believes that subjective consciousness is something that arises when computation attains a certain kind of complexity. \u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Last summer, Uri told me a story from his youth. \u00a0In college, he had dated a young woman, a passionate political activist. \u00a0Years after he had lost touch with her, she sunk into depression with the election of Ronald Reagan. \u00a0Uri awoke one night, sweating and screaming, from a nightmare in which she had jumped from a building. \u00a0Though he had not talked to her in several years, he reached out and tried to contact her the next morning, and her parents informed him she had killed herself that very night, jumping from the window of her apartment. \u00a0Uri was shaken at the time, but he has filed the experience in his memory as a coincidence, a curious anecdote with no particular message about the way our world works. <\/span><\/p>\n

Sitting in a canoe, listening to Uri\u2019s story, I asked him if he thought an artificial intelligence might ever have such dreams. \u00a0What would he think if his story and many like it were collected in a stastical database, and it could be demonstrated that such \u201ccoincidences\u201d were far too frequent do be dismissed, that their composite probability was far rarer than \u201cfive sigma\u201d (roughly \u201cone chance in a million\u201d), which is a conventional threshold for announcing that physics has discovered a new particle. \u00a0He responded thoughtfully: \u00a0He didn\u2019t have time to do that kind of analysis. \u00a0It depends on so many people\u2019s stories, and people\u2019s memories of such things aren\u2019t so reliable. \u00a0But if it could be established, he said, he would be forced to conclude there were new sub-atomic forces that brains can use to communicate, and that physics had not yet discovered. \u00a0In any case, he was committed to the idea that reality is physical \u2014 space, time, matter and nothing else \u2014 and that every phenomenon of nature must be explainable in reductionist terms. \u00a0By definition.<\/span><\/p>\n

\n

How Science came to be narrow-minded, with universal ambitious<\/b><\/p>\n

Don\u2019t doubt the Creator, because it is inconceivable that accidents alone could be\u00a0the controller of this universe.
\n<\/span>\u2014 Isaac Newton<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Newton\u2019s scientific ambition was prodigious. \u00a0He first conceived the idea that the universe was governed by precise mathematical laws that were independent of place and time. \u00a0But he never imagined that physics was a <\/span>complete<\/i><\/b> picture of the world. \u00a0It was only in the 19th Century that the idea took hold that physical law might explain everything. \u00a0Science had been enormously successful in accounting for diverse phenomena, expanding again and again to explain more of our world. \u00a0Then scientific philosophy made an audacious leap: <\/span>Every phenomenon in our universe is regular. \u00a0All of our experience can be accounted for in terms of deterministic mathematical laws.<\/i><\/b><\/p>\n

Is this statement true? \u00a0We all assume it is. \u00a0But in fact, it is an empirical statement, a bold one, to be sure, and all the more reason it should be challenged and tested experimentally.<\/span><\/p>\n

Of course, it\u2019s not literally true that two experimenters doing the same experiment always find the same result. \u00a0There\u2019s experimental error\u2014mistakes and misjudgments that enter any human enterprise. \u00a0And in biology, there is the complication that no two organisms are exactly alike. \u00a0These things were understood and accounted for in the Nineteenth Century. \u00a0This was the time when \u201cvitalism\u201d was stripped out of biology, and living things were boldly assumed to depend on the same mechanistic laws as non-living matter. \u00a0Biology was conceived to be built upon chemistry, and chemistry could be understood as the interactions of atoms. \u00a0It was at the level of atomic physics that the Universal Machine operated in a manner precisely determined by mathematical laws.<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

But 20th Century science shattered determinism. \u00a0The Scientific World-view retreated just far enough to allow for quantum randomness and the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle. \u00a0\u00a0<\/b><\/p>\n

\u201cPhilosophers have said that if the same circumstances don\u2019t always produce the same results, predictions are impossible and science will collapse. Here is a circumstance that produces different results: identical photons are coming down in the same direction to the same piece of glass. We cannot predict whether a given photon will arrive at A or B. All we can predict is that out of 100 photons that come down, an average of 4 will be reflected by the front surface. Does this mean that physics, a science of great exactitude, has been reduced to calculating only the probability of an event, and not predicting exactly what will happen? Yes. That’s a retreat, but that\u2019s the way it is: Nature permits us to calculate only probabilities. Yet science has not collapsed.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

\u2014 Richard Feynman<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

To Einstein\u2019s consternation, God <\/span>does <\/i><\/b>play dice with the world. \u00a0When the Twentieth Century discovered quantum indeterminacy, most philosophers of science made the minimal modification to their deterministic picture. \u00a0<\/span>To them, the future state of the universe is determined by its present state plus pure chance. \u00a0<\/i><\/b>In this paradigm, there is nothing outside physics, or if there is such a thing as \u201csoul\u201d or \u201cspirit\u201d or \u201cfree will\u201d, it is irrelevant to science and to experience. \u00a0It can have no observable effects, because the physical universe is a closed system, governed perfectly by a combination of deterministic laws and pure chance.<\/span><\/p>\n

This is the philosophy of \u201cmaterialism\u201d or \u201cphysicalism\u201d that has become synonymous with the scientific world-view today. \u00a0But it is far more explicit than the original scientific world-view, which says only that our knowledge of the world depends on empirical observation plus mathematical logic. \u00a0In fact, the original scientific world-view is a system for discovering truth, but it is silent about what that truth ought to be. \u00a0This expanded scientific world-view is not just a statement about methods, but contains a description of the nature of the world. \u00a0It is a scientific theory, in the sense that it says something about the empirical nature of reality. \u00a0Like all scientific theories, the expanded scientific world-view can never be proven true, but it can be falsified by observation.<\/span><\/p>\n

The original scientific world-view as bequeathed to us by the Enlightenment is an epistomology which we can accept or reject, but no arguments can be adduced for or against it. \u00a0The expanded scientific world-view is a statement about the world, and we may legitimately ask, \u201cIs it true?\u201d<\/p>\n

\n

Reproducibility<\/b><\/p>\n

The issue of reproducibility is the crux of the matter, and it is related to science in two ways.<\/p>\n

http:\/\/www.musingsone.com\/2015\/09\/why-most-published-data-are-not.html<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

On the one hand, science seems to depend on reproducibility, at least in the statistical sense. \u00a0If different experimenters at different times and places get different results from the same experiment, how can we ever hope to come to agreement about the world we live in? \u00a0Reproducibility\u2014in the expanded, statistical sense\u2014seems to be a necessary feature of the world if we are to be able to study the world with science.<\/span><\/p>\n

On the other hand, we may treat reproducibility as an empirical question. \u00a0Is it true that the same experiment always results in the same results, at least statistically? \u00a0To rephrase more provocatively: \u00a0Is it true that the universe is governed by scientific laws that always hold true, or are there exceptions and one-off happenings, things that occur sometimes but without a regularity we can codify?<\/span><\/p>\n

We might ask, \u201care miracles real?\u201d \u00a0Should the scientific world-view take a firm stance on this issue and answer, \u201cNo!\u201d? \u00a0Or should science be open-minded, and consider the possibility that those who report miracles are not always deluded or mistaken? <\/span><\/p>\n

Evidence that we need a new model<\/b><\/p>\n

From one stage of our being to the next
\nWe pass unconscious o’er a slender bridge,
\nThe momentary work of unseen hands,
\nWhich crumbles down behind us; looking back,
\nWe see the other shore, the gulf between,
\nAnd, marvelling how we won to where we stand,
\n<\/span>Content ourselves to call the builder Chance.
\n\u2014 James Russell Lowell<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

There is no shortage of credible reports that cannot be explained by the reductionist paradigm of science, but most have been shunted out of the mainstream journals, attacked or simply ignored.<\/span><\/p>\n

Perhaps you have had a dream or premonition similar to Uri\u2019s. \u00a0If not, you probably know someone who has. \u00a0It has become common for scientists to dismiss \u201canecdotal evidence\u201d without feeling a need to explain it. \u00a0This comes from a ubiquitous assumption that all experiments are replicable \u2014 exactly the assumption which I think we need to challenge.<\/span><\/p>\n

Daryl Bem is an emeritus professor in the Cornell Psychology Dept, recently retired after a long and distinguished career doing mainstream research about stimulus and response. \u00a0In one of his last publications, he broke into a well-regarded psychological journal with an <\/span>article<\/span><\/a> that documented responses in human subjects that preceded the stimulus. \u00a0This is precognition. \u00a0The subject\u2019s subconscious knew or sensed what image was about to appear before him on a computer screen. \u00a0Julia Mossbridge <\/span>summarized<\/span><\/a> a substantial body of research, which collectively corroborates the reality of precognition with 99.999999999% certainty.<\/span><\/p>\n

Robert Jahn<\/a>, retired dean of the engineering school at Princeton University stumbled (through his student\u2019s term project) upon evidence for the ability of human intention to affect probabilities that ought to be \u201cquantum random\u201d. \u00a0Jahn had the curiosity to investigate further.\u00a0 When the anomaly wouldn\u2019t go away, he refined the experiment and collected data over 30 years, by which time his results had achieved 5-sigma statistical significance \u2014 on a par with evidence for the Higgs Boson. \u00a0Jahn was ostracized and ridiculed, and colleagues began to discredit his work in aerospace engineering based on his willingness to openly consider the possibility that the human mind might be able to affect quantum processes outside the organism. \u00a0<\/p>\n

Dean Radin<\/a> has conducted a broad array of experiments that demonstrate different aspects of telepathy, precognition and telekinesis. \u00a0He has a background in physics, and routinely takes extraordinary measures to guarantee the isolation of his experiments from extraneous physical influences. \u00a0In one recent project<\/a>, he found that focused attention of a person who is not in physical contact with the equipment can shift interference fringes of laser light passing through two slits. \u00a0This connection between thought and quantum is akin to results reported by Jahn.<\/p>\n

Outside the world of parapsychology, there are uncontroversial animal behaviors that defy explanation. \u00a0Fish<\/a>, turtles<\/a> and cetaceans<\/a> routinely navigate thousands of miles through the ocean, their guidance system unknown to science. \u00a0Each fall, a generation of Monarch butterflies<\/a> is able to retrace the 2,000-mile migration path flown by their great, great, great grandparents six months earlier. \u00a0Flatworms have been conditioned to respond to light, then they are ground up and fed to other flatworms, who acquire some of the conditioning through cannibalism [skeptic\u2019s account<\/a>].<\/p>\n

Dozens of labs around the world have successfully replicated the cold fusion experiments of Pons and Fleischmann. \u00a0Reports of their work are sequestered in this on-line journal<\/a> because mainstream physics journals have declared that cold fusion is impossible. \u00a0In fact, there is nothing in fundamental physics that precludes cold fusion; it is, after all, a highly exothermic reaction, and the energy release is exactly as predicted. But cold fusion implies a new bulk quantum effect (akin to superconductivity, superfluidity and lasers) for which there is yet no theory. [video summary<\/a>]\u00a0 The physicist who taught me quantum mechanics<\/a> at Harvard was a Nobel laureate who became irate when the American Physical Society refused to publish his proto-theory of cold fusion.<\/p>\n

Ian Stevenson<\/a> and Jim Tucker<\/a> are medical doctors who have each spent decades investigating cases \u201csuggestive of reincarnation\u201d. \u00a0Children recall past lives, with details about the circumstances of that life that are later corroborated. \u00a0Stevenson noted the frequent presence of birthmarks where former selves suffered trauma at death. \u00a0Helen Wambach<\/a> and Carol Bowman<\/a> have used hypnosis to help adults find access to information about past lives.<\/p>\n

The ganzfeld protocol<\/a> is the most reliable experimental procedure for demonstrating telepathy. \u00a0A meta-analysis<\/a> of 59 ganzfeld studies reports a combined success rate of 30% in identifying a target photograph when the chance hit rate should be 1 in 4. \u00a0The improbability of this result has been calculated in different ways, with results from 10-12<\/sup> to 10-8<\/sup>.<\/p>\n

\n

Through a glass darkly: \u00a0Where post-reductionist science is headed<\/b><\/p>\n

All the progress in science since the Enlightenment has built on a reductionist paradigm: breaking down the whole into parts, explaining the parts in terms of influences that are nearby in time and space. \u00a0If this is not the whole story, then we might imagine there are relationships among distant events. \u00a0There might be large-scale patterns that cannot be explained as \u201cemergent\u201d from local laws. \u00a0There may relationships that appear to us as retrocausality. \u00a0There might be destiny.<\/p>\n

It is clear to me that what physics calls\u00a0\u201cquantum random\u201d is not random at all, but rather is determined non-locally, via quantum entanglement.\u00a0 Events distant in time and space are linked in a manner that baffle our usual methods of scientific inquiry, but that may be discoverable by a new kind of science.<\/span><\/p>\n

There is nothing un-scientific about such a hypothesis, and in fact quantum mechanical \u201centanglement\u201d suggests that such patterns must exist. \u00a0David Bohm has laid foundations for a science based on holistic patterns in an Undivided Universe<\/a>. \u00a0He offers us a beginning toward understanding an \u201cimplicate order\u201d that may complement the explicit order in time and space that is the basis of all of mainstream physics.<\/p>\n

The Constellation, by Joan Miro<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Possibly related is the idea that mind has an existence separate from matter, that free will operates in a sphere that is able to influence matter on a quantum level. \u00a0This could be a resolution in Cartesian dualism of David Chalmers\u2019s hard problem<\/a>. \u00a0One link between the realm of the self outside of space and time and the realm of physical matter could be through the quantum mechanics of the brain. \u00a0Roger Penrose and Stuart Hameroff<\/a> have proposed a model. \u00a0Stuart Kauffman<\/a> cites evidence that neurotransmitters in the brain are poised on a quantum knife edge where their behavior is dictated either by randomness (in the conventional view) or could this be the portal by which intention enters into physical behavior?<\/p>\n

It may turn out that life is not an opportunistic parasite in a vast, cold and meaningless cosmos. \u00a0Life may be built into the laws of physics at the very foundation. \u00a0It may be that living behaviors are woven into the fabric of the cosmos. \u00a0Or it may be that awareness and free will live in a realm separate from time and space, but linked to physics at the quantum level. \u00a0This would be a way to resolve the Anthropic Coincidences<\/a> without resort to an embarrassment of universes<\/a>.<\/p>\n

These ideas are not un-scientific, but they are difficult to study with current scientific methods. \u00a0At the dawn of the Twenty-first Century, experimental science is bursting at the seams with phenomena crying out for an expanded scientific paradigm. \u00a0The crisis will not be resolved by keeping speculative science out of the mainstream journals. \u00a0It is not likely to be settled by a brilliant guess about the nature of reality that resolves all our anomalies in one fell swoop. \u00a0The only way forward is for science to expand its methods and entertain a broad array of wild, new ideas, most of which are bound to fail. \u00a0But if we open the gates to speculative ideas, if we shake off taboos about teleology and holism, if we broaden the scope of experiments and our ways of understanding them…then I trust that our collective brainpower will be up to the task of formulating a picture of the world that comprehends a greatly expanded \u2014 dare I say \u201cwondrous\u201d \u2014 vision of our world.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

This time each year, I take the liberty of posting something more speculative and personal. \u00a0In this essay, I propose that everything we consider the \u201cscientific world-view\u201d is only half the story, and that science must expand its foundations if it aspires to \u00a0be a complete account of reality. \u00a0 A reductionist approach to science … Read more<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":65,"featured_media":666,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-665","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"yoast_head":"\nThe Other Half of Science - Josh Mitteldorf<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/scienceblog.com\/joshmitteldorf\/2017\/12\/31\/the-other-half-of-science\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"The Other Half of Science\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"This time each year, I take the liberty of posting something more speculative and personal. \u00a0In this essay, I propose that everything we consider the \u201cscientific world-view\u201d is only half the story, and that science must expand its foundations if it aspires to \u00a0be a complete account of reality. \u00a0 A reductionist approach to science ... Read more\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/scienceblog.com\/joshmitteldorf\/2017\/12\/31\/the-other-half-of-science\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Josh Mitteldorf\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2017-12-31T20:03:20+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-01-01T20:32:30+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/scienceblog.com\/joshmitteldorf\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/2\/2017\/12\/sky.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"2241\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"1500\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Josh Mitteldorf\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Josh Mitteldorf\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"15 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/scienceblog.com\\\/joshmitteldorf\\\/2017\\\/12\\\/31\\\/the-other-half-of-science\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/scienceblog.com\\\/joshmitteldorf\\\/2017\\\/12\\\/31\\\/the-other-half-of-science\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Josh Mitteldorf\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/scienceblog.com\\\/joshmitteldorf\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/214c5d1dad9f15c48f03128d5cfccdb1\"},\"headline\":\"The Other Half of Science\",\"datePublished\":\"2017-12-31T20:03:20+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-01-01T20:32:30+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/scienceblog.com\\\/joshmitteldorf\\\/2017\\\/12\\\/31\\\/the-other-half-of-science\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":2909,\"commentCount\":123,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/scienceblog.com\\\/joshmitteldorf\\\/#organization\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/scienceblog.com\\\/joshmitteldorf\\\/2017\\\/12\\\/31\\\/the-other-half-of-science\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/scienceblog.com\\\/joshmitteldorf\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/2\\\/2017\\\/12\\\/sky.jpg\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/scienceblog.com\\\/joshmitteldorf\\\/2017\\\/12\\\/31\\\/the-other-half-of-science\\\/#respond\"]}],\"copyrightYear\":\"2017\",\"copyrightHolder\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/scienceblog.com\\\/#organization\"}},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/scienceblog.com\\\/joshmitteldorf\\\/2017\\\/12\\\/31\\\/the-other-half-of-science\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/scienceblog.com\\\/joshmitteldorf\\\/2017\\\/12\\\/31\\\/the-other-half-of-science\\\/\",\"name\":\"The Other Half of Science - Josh Mitteldorf\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/scienceblog.com\\\/joshmitteldorf\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/scienceblog.com\\\/joshmitteldorf\\\/2017\\\/12\\\/31\\\/the-other-half-of-science\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/scienceblog.com\\\/joshmitteldorf\\\/2017\\\/12\\\/31\\\/the-other-half-of-science\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/scienceblog.com\\\/joshmitteldorf\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/2\\\/2017\\\/12\\\/sky.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2017-12-31T20:03:20+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-01-01T20:32:30+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/scienceblog.com\\\/joshmitteldorf\\\/2017\\\/12\\\/31\\\/the-other-half-of-science\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/scienceblog.com\\\/joshmitteldorf\\\/2017\\\/12\\\/31\\\/the-other-half-of-science\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/scienceblog.com\\\/joshmitteldorf\\\/2017\\\/12\\\/31\\\/the-other-half-of-science\\\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/scienceblog.com\\\/joshmitteldorf\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/2\\\/2017\\\/12\\\/sky.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/scienceblog.com\\\/joshmitteldorf\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/2\\\/2017\\\/12\\\/sky.jpg\",\"width\":2241,\"height\":1500},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/scienceblog.com\\\/joshmitteldorf\\\/2017\\\/12\\\/31\\\/the-other-half-of-science\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/scienceblog.com\\\/joshmitteldorf\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"The Other Half of Science\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/scienceblog.com\\\/joshmitteldorf\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/scienceblog.com\\\/joshmitteldorf\\\/\",\"name\":\"Josh Mitteldorf\",\"description\":\"Aging Matters\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/scienceblog.com\\\/joshmitteldorf\\\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/scienceblog.com\\\/joshmitteldorf\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/scienceblog.com\\\/joshmitteldorf\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Josh Mitteldorf\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/scienceblog.com\\\/joshmitteldorf\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/scienceblog.com\\\/joshmitteldorf\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/scienceblog.com\\\/joshmitteldorf\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/2\\\/2024\\\/09\\\/1058476001.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/scienceblog.com\\\/joshmitteldorf\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/2\\\/2024\\\/09\\\/1058476001.jpg\",\"width\":864,\"height\":363,\"caption\":\"Josh Mitteldorf\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/scienceblog.com\\\/joshmitteldorf\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"}},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/scienceblog.com\\\/joshmitteldorf\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/214c5d1dad9f15c48f03128d5cfccdb1\",\"name\":\"Josh Mitteldorf\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/d3a8498f3d727156673030716d233edc57840f110d501b1b523e1780e9043b92?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/d3a8498f3d727156673030716d233edc57840f110d501b1b523e1780e9043b92?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/d3a8498f3d727156673030716d233edc57840f110d501b1b523e1780e9043b92?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Josh Mitteldorf\"},\"description\":\"Josh Mitteldorf studies evolutionary theory of aging using computer simulations. The surprising fact that our bodies are genetically programmed to age and to die offers an enormous opportunity for medical intervention. It may be that therapies to slow the progress of aging need not repair or regenerate anything, but only need to interfere with an existing program of self-destruction. Mitteldorf has taught a weekly yoga class for thirty years. He is an advocate for vigorous self care, including exercise, meditation and caloric restriction. After earning a PhD in astrophysicist, Mitteldorf moved to evolutionary biology as a primary field in 1996. He has taught at Harvard, Berkeley, Bryn Mawr, LaSalle and Temple University. He is presently affiliated with MIT as a visiting scholar. In private life, Mitteldorf is an advocate for election integrity as well as public health. He is an avid amateur musician, playing piano in chamber groups, French horn in community orchestras. His two daughters are among the first children adopted from China in the mid-1980s. Much to the surprise of evolutionary biologists, genetic experiments indicate that aging has been selected as an adaptation for its own sake. This poses a conundrum: the impact of aging on individual fitness is wholly negative, so aging must be regarded as a kind of evolutionary altruism. Unlike other forms of evolutionary altruism, aging offers benefits to the community that are weak, and not well focussed on near kin of the altruist. This makes the mechanism challenging to understand and to model. more at http:\\\/\\\/mathforum.org\\\/~josh\",\"sameAs\":[\"http:\\\/\\\/AgingAdvice.org\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/scienceblog.com\\\/joshmitteldorf\\\/author\\\/joshmitteldorf\\\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"The Other Half of Science - Josh Mitteldorf","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/scienceblog.com\/joshmitteldorf\/2017\/12\/31\/the-other-half-of-science\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"The Other Half of Science","og_description":"This time each year, I take the liberty of posting something more speculative and personal. \u00a0In this essay, I propose that everything we consider the \u201cscientific world-view\u201d is only half the story, and that science must expand its foundations if it aspires to \u00a0be a complete account of reality. \u00a0 A reductionist approach to science ... Read more","og_url":"https:\/\/scienceblog.com\/joshmitteldorf\/2017\/12\/31\/the-other-half-of-science\/","og_site_name":"Josh Mitteldorf","article_published_time":"2017-12-31T20:03:20+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-01-01T20:32:30+00:00","og_image":[{"width":2241,"height":1500,"url":"https:\/\/scienceblog.com\/joshmitteldorf\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/2\/2017\/12\/sky.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Josh Mitteldorf","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Josh Mitteldorf","Est. reading time":"15 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/scienceblog.com\/joshmitteldorf\/2017\/12\/31\/the-other-half-of-science\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/scienceblog.com\/joshmitteldorf\/2017\/12\/31\/the-other-half-of-science\/"},"author":{"name":"Josh Mitteldorf","@id":"https:\/\/scienceblog.com\/joshmitteldorf\/#\/schema\/person\/214c5d1dad9f15c48f03128d5cfccdb1"},"headline":"The Other Half of Science","datePublished":"2017-12-31T20:03:20+00:00","dateModified":"2018-01-01T20:32:30+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/scienceblog.com\/joshmitteldorf\/2017\/12\/31\/the-other-half-of-science\/"},"wordCount":2909,"commentCount":123,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/scienceblog.com\/joshmitteldorf\/#organization"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/scienceblog.com\/joshmitteldorf\/2017\/12\/31\/the-other-half-of-science\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/scienceblog.com\/joshmitteldorf\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/2\/2017\/12\/sky.jpg","inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/scienceblog.com\/joshmitteldorf\/2017\/12\/31\/the-other-half-of-science\/#respond"]}],"copyrightYear":"2017","copyrightHolder":{"@id":"https:\/\/scienceblog.com\/#organization"}},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/scienceblog.com\/joshmitteldorf\/2017\/12\/31\/the-other-half-of-science\/","url":"https:\/\/scienceblog.com\/joshmitteldorf\/2017\/12\/31\/the-other-half-of-science\/","name":"The Other Half of Science - Josh Mitteldorf","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/scienceblog.com\/joshmitteldorf\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/scienceblog.com\/joshmitteldorf\/2017\/12\/31\/the-other-half-of-science\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/scienceblog.com\/joshmitteldorf\/2017\/12\/31\/the-other-half-of-science\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/scienceblog.com\/joshmitteldorf\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/2\/2017\/12\/sky.jpg","datePublished":"2017-12-31T20:03:20+00:00","dateModified":"2018-01-01T20:32:30+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/scienceblog.com\/joshmitteldorf\/2017\/12\/31\/the-other-half-of-science\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/scienceblog.com\/joshmitteldorf\/2017\/12\/31\/the-other-half-of-science\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/scienceblog.com\/joshmitteldorf\/2017\/12\/31\/the-other-half-of-science\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/scienceblog.com\/joshmitteldorf\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/2\/2017\/12\/sky.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/scienceblog.com\/joshmitteldorf\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/2\/2017\/12\/sky.jpg","width":2241,"height":1500},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/scienceblog.com\/joshmitteldorf\/2017\/12\/31\/the-other-half-of-science\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/scienceblog.com\/joshmitteldorf\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"The Other Half of Science"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/scienceblog.com\/joshmitteldorf\/#website","url":"https:\/\/scienceblog.com\/joshmitteldorf\/","name":"Josh Mitteldorf","description":"Aging Matters","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/scienceblog.com\/joshmitteldorf\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/scienceblog.com\/joshmitteldorf\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/scienceblog.com\/joshmitteldorf\/#organization","name":"Josh Mitteldorf","url":"https:\/\/scienceblog.com\/joshmitteldorf\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/scienceblog.com\/joshmitteldorf\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/scienceblog.com\/joshmitteldorf\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/2\/2024\/09\/1058476001.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/scienceblog.com\/joshmitteldorf\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/2\/2024\/09\/1058476001.jpg","width":864,"height":363,"caption":"Josh Mitteldorf"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/scienceblog.com\/joshmitteldorf\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"}},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/scienceblog.com\/joshmitteldorf\/#\/schema\/person\/214c5d1dad9f15c48f03128d5cfccdb1","name":"Josh Mitteldorf","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/d3a8498f3d727156673030716d233edc57840f110d501b1b523e1780e9043b92?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/d3a8498f3d727156673030716d233edc57840f110d501b1b523e1780e9043b92?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/d3a8498f3d727156673030716d233edc57840f110d501b1b523e1780e9043b92?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Josh Mitteldorf"},"description":"Josh Mitteldorf studies evolutionary theory of aging using computer simulations. The surprising fact that our bodies are genetically programmed to age and to die offers an enormous opportunity for medical intervention. It may be that therapies to slow the progress of aging need not repair or regenerate anything, but only need to interfere with an existing program of self-destruction. Mitteldorf has taught a weekly yoga class for thirty years. He is an advocate for vigorous self care, including exercise, meditation and caloric restriction. After earning a PhD in astrophysicist, Mitteldorf moved to evolutionary biology as a primary field in 1996. He has taught at Harvard, Berkeley, Bryn Mawr, LaSalle and Temple University. He is presently affiliated with MIT as a visiting scholar. In private life, Mitteldorf is an advocate for election integrity as well as public health. He is an avid amateur musician, playing piano in chamber groups, French horn in community orchestras. His two daughters are among the first children adopted from China in the mid-1980s. Much to the surprise of evolutionary biologists, genetic experiments indicate that aging has been selected as an adaptation for its own sake. This poses a conundrum: the impact of aging on individual fitness is wholly negative, so aging must be regarded as a kind of evolutionary altruism. Unlike other forms of evolutionary altruism, aging offers benefits to the community that are weak, and not well focussed on near kin of the altruist. This makes the mechanism challenging to understand and to model. more at http:\/\/mathforum.org\/~josh","sameAs":["http:\/\/AgingAdvice.org"],"url":"https:\/\/scienceblog.com\/joshmitteldorf\/author\/joshmitteldorf\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/scienceblog.com\/joshmitteldorf\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/2\/2017\/12\/sky.jpg","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/pgtN8h-aJ","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/scienceblog.com\/joshmitteldorf\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/665","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/scienceblog.com\/joshmitteldorf\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/scienceblog.com\/joshmitteldorf\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/scienceblog.com\/joshmitteldorf\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/65"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/scienceblog.com\/joshmitteldorf\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=665"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/scienceblog.com\/joshmitteldorf\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/665\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/scienceblog.com\/joshmitteldorf\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/666"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/scienceblog.com\/joshmitteldorf\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=665"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/scienceblog.com\/joshmitteldorf\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=665"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/scienceblog.com\/joshmitteldorf\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=665"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}