š§µ 100 years ago today, the New York Times announced the death of rationalism. 
The NYT reported Eddingtonās announcement that a measurement of the deflection of starlight by the gravitational field of the sun had confirmed Einsteinās theory of general relativity.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eddingtonā¦
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eddingtonā¦
Retroactively, after decades of difficult work by top philosophers, we understand this test of relativity as a triumph of the scientific worldview.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tests_of_ā¦
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tests_of_ā¦
For decades, general relativity was popularly felt as a disastrous disconfirmation of the scientific worldview. Rationalism collapsed as a source of certainty, and never fully recovered.
One could date the first crack of postmodernity to 100 years ago today.
One could date the first crack of postmodernity to 100 years ago today.
It is now difficult to comprehend how completely and shockingly relativity shattered rationalism.
For millennia, Euclidās _Elements_ was *the* eternal source of absolute, unquestionable Truth about the fundamental nature of reality.
Relativity showed it was just false.
For millennia, Euclidās _Elements_ was *the* eternal source of absolute, unquestionable Truth about the fundamental nature of reality.
Relativity showed it was just false.
Cultural historians take Newtonian physics as the foundation of the European Enlightenment. It provided a complete understanding of the material world, with perfect certainty.
Modernity consists of extending that paradigm to all realms of meaning.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_Enā¦
Modernity consists of extending that paradigm to all realms of meaning.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_Enā¦
In the 1920s, intellectuals of all stripes tried to assimilate the disproof of Newton into some new version of modernity that would take relativity into account. This was entirely unsuccessful.
Meanwhile, popular faith in rationality, in modernity, in the world making sense, had already been profoundly shaken by the Great War, just ended.
āLights all askew in the heavensā was understood as more of the same: confirmation of cosmic senselessness.
meaningness.com/systems-crisisā¦
āLights all askew in the heavensā was understood as more of the same: confirmation of cosmic senselessness.
meaningness.com/systems-crisisā¦
The 1919 announcement that SCIENTISTS PROVE WORLD MAKES NO SENSE was a Big Deal in a way we have forgotten. It was misappropriated as a totem of nebulosity in general. Anti-rationalists seized it as justification for the general relativity of all truth.
britannica.com/science/relatiā¦
britannica.com/science/relatiā¦
It is hard now to understand relativity as disproof of scientific rationality because the current scientistic-rationalist worldview is profoundly different in form, as well as content, from that of the early 20th century. Logical positivism to the rescue!
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logical_pā¦
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logical_pā¦
Logical positivism attempted to rescue scientistic rationalism from two deep wounds: general relativity and the crisis of the foundations of mathematics. It succeeded in rethinking science in a way that made relativity acceptable. Unfortunately, that was overshadowed by eventsā¦
Hardly anyone understood relativity; no one understood quantum. It said everything is inherently random, and statements could be true and false at the same time (Schrƶdingerās cat).
Again this was culturally appropriated as a general-purpose justification for irrational woo.
Again this was culturally appropriated as a general-purpose justification for irrational woo.
When quantum arrived, the logical positivists strove valiantly to incorporate it into their new rationalism. They didnāt get far, and the attempt was overwhelmed as new blows to rationalism kept coming. Gƶdelās Incompleteness Theorem was the next most influential culturally.
Logical positivism finally disintegrated altogether in the 1960s. It failed not for one reason, but for dozens, each individually fatal. I know of no discussion enumerating them all. _The Eggplant_ covers more of them than any source Iāve found. meaningness.com/eggplant
Logical positivism was the last serious attempt to rescue rationalism. All subsequent rationalisms have been unserious, in the sense that they donāt even try to address the well-known problems that wrecked the logical positivist program.
No coincidence the postmodern era began shortly after logical positivism collapsed. Rationalism was the foundational ideology of modernity. Without that, the essential chain of justification broke, and the ship of modernity was wrecked on the stormy seas of meaning.
Science still works, some of the time, of course. Rationality is still better than irrationality. Why?
Stubborn clinging to the wreck of rationalism renders asking that question impossibleāmuch less answering it.
Stubborn clinging to the wreck of rationalism renders asking that question impossibleāmuch less answering it.
Weāre still floundering in the storm of postmodern irrationalism, announced by the NYT 100 years ago today.
We can do better. We can rebuild the flotsam of a broken modernity into new, sea-worthy watercraft.
We can do better. We can rebuild the flotsam of a broken modernity into new, sea-worthy watercraft.
Follow-up to this thread. Several replies objected that relativity couldnāt have been a shock, because science consists of replacing incomplete approximate theories with successively better ones. >
This is not at all how science was understood in 1900. Science in those days found absolute, eternal, exact Truths.
The āsuccessively better theoriesā story, taught in high school now, was invented in the 20th century precisely to account for relativity and quantum.
The āsuccessively better theoriesā story, taught in high school now, was invented in the 20th century precisely to account for relativity and quantum.
