Friday 7 October 2016

On explanation far and close, interesting and uninteresting

When scientists say that explaining the formation of chunks of matter (for example planets, energy, atoms) or the distribution of information is an explanation of everything that is important for us these days, that's exactly as much of an explanation as saying that 'and then people started growing crops, settled down, and that's why we have culture and science today!' Meaning: it is not an interesting explanation. It is an explanation, like it is an explanation of why I eat a pizza now that I am a human and hunger is a powerful motivation that moves me to act. Sure, but this does not explain why I'm eating pizza, why I did go along with this motivation right now, not twenty minutes ago or half an hour later, why I did not rather occupy myself with something else to push the hunger back - as any normal adult human being can do. These further questions are not answered by a hazy allusion to general, species-level motivations.
Of course there would be scientific explanations of why I'm eating a pizza now, or why there science and culture today. But these will be immensely complex, interdisciplinary explanations, where each details will matter a great deal. The world is complex, and hence there are no simple explanations of it. If someone is not willing to get down with the details, then they should not profess that they have explained everything. Such self-serving, ego-boasting phrases don't help anyone.

No comments:

Post a Comment