Page Content (OCR)
101CHAPTER 19 To unite or to separate? THIS A PRIORI INTANGIBLE NOTION of time is the keystone of all of the following developments. The difficulty of the scien-tific exercise consists of dissociating from the fact in order to analyze it. Inother words, the ideal point of view for a scientist is that of a discrete andimpartial observer. The canonical approach of science, based on the expe-rience outside oneself, is therefore the mascot of research professionalsand the essential reason for the rise of materialism. If the research object is outside of us, then the formal approval is validated by separating the observer from the object observed. This iswhat lays the foundation for objectivity as it has been understood sincethe Age of Enlightenment. This separation is not just useful in research.It is indispensable, for it establishes the legitimacy of the researcher! Inother words, truth requires separation. However, it seems that mysticshave always seen reality as a unity. We are beginning to understandthat the intelligence of materialist science is a rather pale copy of thescience of the future: holistic science. This notion of separation is what underlies the “hard” or “pure” sci- ences. We can avoid the subject or pay lip service to the influence of theobserver on quantum mechanics experiments, but we continue to pre-tend it does not exist when we use the representations (equations) ofmathematical formalism. A physicist (specialized in missile manufac-turing) who sat next to me at lunch one day told me about the gapbetween reality, concept and representation: “it is not perfect, but it isthe only way we know how. In addition, experiments often prove usright.” Indeed, we have not found a better way yet. It is true…they are right because they “make” it so in the frame- work of the formalism they invented; an increasingly complicated