Preface to the proposed project, Presence

"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy." Hamlet, Shakespeare

Everyone has a cosmology, an assortment of beliefs about how reality is constructed and functions.

Cosmologies are the pragmatic extensions of origin stories. Origin stories feature fantastical elements, turtles becoming continents, volcano goddesses who embody as islands, bubbling nothings convulsing into big bangs, primordial ooze learning to live, and original sins negating earthly paradises.

While these stories are playful or dramatic, the cosmologies they presage are pragmatic. Our lives bloom from what we believe to be true, which in turn determines what we expect and anticipate.

Does belief effect our experience of reality or can they change real reality?

A hard science cosmology might opine that most of the sparkles in the night sky we call stars are massive fusion reactors, and are so far away that their light we see, photons impacting our retinas, might be thousands or millions of years old. Someone with a hard science cosmology would probably not assert that the position of stars and our neighboring planets could predict our personal futures. Other folks might buy into the fusion reactor idea but still check their horoscopes on a lark, or even feel astrology explains the ups and downs of their life.

Which cosmology is correct, that is to say most accurately reflects how things actually are? Which cosmology offers the most virtuosic life experience? Which cosmology offers safety? Which cosmology makes it easy to fit in?

Questions like these hint at the cosmology a person adopts, whether deliberately or by default. In this sense, cosmologies seems to be about answering an individual's most pressing need or desire.  Cosmologies are like a mental map of observed circumstance that helps the individual navigate to an emotional destination. Maybe that destination is some flavor of success - justice, acceptance, safety, wealth, health, intimacy, etc.

Wait a minute! Wouldn't the preferred cosmology would one that accurately reflects the way things actually are SCIENCE clearly offers the tightest correspondence to reality. Consider jet planes, computers, toasters, a stainless steel spoon or wooden pencil, all products of a scientific perspective and world wide science based infrastructure.

So is scientific cosmology the best cosmology?

Science is certainly not complete... and that's a good thing. An authentic hard science cosmology is by nature a work in progress. There are a lot of unanswered questions, and probably we'll always have more profound questions than confident answers.  Incompleteness is what makes science cosmology so useful, because curiosity is implied. This is likely it's strongest feature,, a science cosmology can update.

Does the scientific method offer a map for how to live an awesome life? Can science be wrong?

Deep emotion and intuition are powerful elements in human experience, They can drive the application of the scientific method and science generally but are never components. The arts - dance, music, painting and stories are also outside of science. A hard science cosmology misses or discounts many vital components of our human experience, and may not facilitate an awesome life.

Science can definitely be wrong. Science can even be corrupted and politicized. During the 2020 covid pandemic, "trust the science" was used to stifle and shut down scientists that didn't agree with lock downs and gene altering vaccines. Trust the science is about as anti-science as it gets, yet many who identified as scientific were utterly duped or afraid to speak up. The history of science is rife with missteps. and  what about erratics and anomalies that science cannot yet explain?  Scientific cosmology is something of a trap, for what is considered consensus today could become the misunderstanding of tomorrow. The delicious curiosity of hard science could flip into arrogant certainty, not unlike dogmatic religious cosmologies.