Invitation to Donate

                                                                    

You Can Support this Project in the Free Sharing of Knowledge by Making a Donation 

You can support this project materially by making a donation. 

Your money will be used to buy time for research, writing and publication, providing free access to knowledge.

Donations should be paid to the following account:

Account Name : Oluwatoyin Vincent Adepoju

Bank: Access Bank

Account No: 0734810142

SWIFT code for international bank transfers: ABNGNGLA

PROCEDURE AND CRITERIA FOR VETTING AND ACCEPTING SCIENTIFIC DISCOVERY, WITH A FOCUS ON MEDICINE

               

                                                          Compiled and Introduced

                                                                                                                                                                                               

                                                                        by

                                                       Oluwatoyin Vincent Adepoju

                                                                                                                                                          

                                                                  Compcros

                                                                                                                       

                                            Comparative Cognitive Processes and Systems

                                “Exploring Every Corner of the Cosmos in Search of Knowledge”

                                         Unifying the Cosmos in a Grain of Sand”

"It would be nice to know the criteria by which scientific discoveries are vetted and accepted. I know how we do so in my field, African Literary Studies and Cinema Studies…"

Kenneth Harrow on the USAAfrica Dialogues Series Google Group

Contexts of Scientific and Technological Discovery and Creation 

The "criteria by which scientific discoveries are vetted and accepted" within the globally dominant  structure of knowledge and its institutional expressions, of which  modern science is a part, are straightforward.

This epistemic system being globally dominant, these procedures are accepted by those trained in the specialised skills in various disciplines and the laypeople who accept these conventions.  The essence of the procedures are broadly uniform across disciplines, what differs is the specific interpretation of these procedures in various disciplines.  

The essence of the procedures is mutual assessment by anyone with the  universally acknowledged body of skills to make this assessment. 

One may describe scientific and technological discovery and creation as taking place within two major contexts.  These contexts are represented by the  institutions that define the globally dominant structure of knowledge and those outside it. 

The Metaphysical and Epistemic Configuration of the Globally Dominant Knowledge System

The globally dominant structure of knowledge is defined by the metaphysical and epistemic forms that became dominant in Europe after the 17th century Scientific Revolution. This structure of knowledge is centred in understanding reality through methods that may be assessed by anyone who has developed the necessary skills. 

This principle applies across all disciplines, including those that privilege subjectivity, such as the arts, in the sense that even the subjective has to be open to evaluation as to its contribution to knowledge in a particular context. 

Wellek and Warren seemed to have addressed this question in some depth in relation to literature in  their Theory of Literature while Hans-Georg Gadamer  on aesthetics in general is described as privileging the subjective in Truth and Method, but, in relation to Gadamer's background in intellectual culture from Kant to Heidegger, I expect he will be concerned to address the idea of the subjective as a domain of knowledge both private and universal, therefore open to evaluation, to a degree. 

Procedures for Disseminating and Authorizing Knowledge within the Globally Dominant Knowledge System

This structure of knowledge privileges the public dissemination of information through organs that may be accessed by the public and where informed members of the public may evaluate  the information provided. These disseminatory organs privilege communication  in natural language as well as the artificial languages of the sciences, languages which the system's institutions are dedicated to teaching.

A discovery that understands itself as operating within this context would be presented in what is called an academic journal, a gathering place for experts in the field to discuss ideas presented by fellow experts.

Along with this process, it is also relevant to have a new process for creating something, a drug or even a mechanical object, registered with a patent office. The patent office ensures that you have sole rights to monetary gains from this process for a particular number of years, so you may reap financial rewards of your labour.

This patent office may theoretically be located anywhere in the world. The patent office also hires experts to assess the claims you make in your presentation of a new idea. Albert Einstein, one of the greatest innovators in modern thought,  worked in one such office in Berne, Switzerland when he wrote his three epochal scientific papers published in 1905. 

Procedure for Developing and Authorizing Medical Discoveries and Creations in the Globally Dominant Knowledge System

Various contributions from Nigerian institutions and commentators in the wake of a claim to an AIDS cure attributed this year to  Prof. Ibeh of the University of Benin sum up the specifics of these  procedures with reference to science and a focus on  medicine. 

NAFDAC: National Agency for Food and Drug Administration:

"There is a laid down protocol for determining efficacy and safety of new medicines and this must be strictly adhered to by all."

University of  Benin:

“There are protocols and procedures.  Going from stage to stage, we give it 

1. clinical trials 

2. which will take it to the Federal Ministry of Health to do [further] clinical trials [ and many other procedures]

3. We will equally have to take it to NAFDAC, and many other things have to be done before you come out with your claims, 

4. and even take it to the World Health Organization

Specifics: 

Ethics Procedures at the Initial Research Stage 

Ibrahim Musa 

[Such research must begin with] Institution review board/ethical clearance committee[approval]very pertinent/cardinal in the field of Medicine; where humans are the subject of the research. 

No serious journal will publish an article that has humans as subjects without getting a copy of the ethical clearance from [the] review board.

Assessment of Research Results by Experts 

Abba Gumel-Professor of Mathematics 

1. Academics... subject their work to the rigorous scrutiny of their peers...and, if accepted, these breakthroughs are published in top quality journals.  

2. Breakthroughs in medical sciences...are published in the top medical sciences journals, such as Nature, Science, PNAS, Lancet, PloS Medicine etc.

 3. [After] preclinical studies getting published for the scientific community to scrutunised the findings...a drug goes in to clinical trials

Patenting 

Ado Abubakar sums up the initial stages  and points to  the subject of patents

1.It will be good to know the IRB processes [Institution review board/ethical clearance committee] and approval followed 

2.What is the reproducibility of their work

3. When are they or have they started the process/ of patency?

Joseph Igietseme-Professor of Medicine

1. ...initial experimental results will enable a scientist or inventor to file a patent; and the filler can broaden the scope of the results as much as allowed by the patent filling office. 

2. What most scientists do is to file a patent and later publish the results; that secures the patent such that nobody else can file patent ownership when the results are published or publicized.

Folorunso Oludayo  Fasina,  Veterinary Science academic 

1. You submit your material for a patent and you send an accompanied document for publication in a reputable journal, whichever comes first, the other work is still protected.

2. ....once the claim has been submitted by you and is under investigation, nobody will be permitted to submit same until your work is proved or thrown out. Once you have the patent...you are in millions (or billions in the case of HIV) because you've got 10 full years to make money unabated. All pharmaceutical companies will be courting you.

Stevek

[A] Patent....means that anyone that uses the knowledge after the patent is in place must do so with the permission of the patent holder - usually by paying the patent holder - or face a lawsuit for damages.  

For drugs or medications, the patented drug is under the brand of the patent holder and no one else can manufacture it under a brand other than the patent holder's without permission or authorization by the patent holder. The drugs or medications revert to 'generic' after the patent period has expired. After this time, the drugs or medication can be manufactured under any brand without permission or authorization. 

Patent registration is [much] different [from] making a new song and publishing it to claim ownership.

The requirement for patent granting include uniqueness (the product has never, formally, existed prior) and validation (the product is real, proof of doing what it claims to do and is different from other products that do the same thing, and proof of transparent reproducibility).

Summation 

Segun Olude

Science wants to measure and test, apply and repeat in a consistent manner, even if there are side effects and contraindications.

 I think it all centres around measurable, repeatable, portable results...[proof]  that any claim is repeatable, and medications can be administered in measurable doses  

Lets address medicine specifically.  If there is an outbreak of influenza, Western science is able to administer exactly the same medicine and dosage to thousands of people at the same time..., they can administer specifically designed solutions that can be repeated over and over [thereby developing]  solutions that can help millions of people at once.

Philosophy of Science

The subject of criteria for acceptance of scientific achievement and the implications of this is perennially explored in the philosophy of science, as represented, for example by the work of Karl Popper, exemplified by The Logic of Scientific Discovery,  by  Paul Feyerabend in Against Method, by Thomas Kuhn's The Structure of Scientific Revolutions  and

more recent work, such as that of Tian Yu Cao, exemplified by  Conceptual Developments of Twentieth Century Field Theories  (a superb introduction accessible to the layperson)  and his contributions to Conceptual Foundations of Quantum Field Theory (  characteristically lucid and yet conceptually and yet poetically rigorous  introduction and first chapter) and possibly  James Gleick's Chaos. 

Sources

 Nigeria: NAFDAC Probes Uniben Professor's HIV/Aids Cure Claims

Nigeria’s University of Benin disowns professor claiming AIDS cure

The message lists of the Nigerian centred listerves

NaijaObserver, NaijaPolitics, NIgerianWorldForum, talkhard, nigerianid, edo-nationality, afenmai@yahoogroups.com, nigerianbiomedicalandlifescientists, Raariga under various threads beginning with the thread "UNIBEN Prof announces alleged cure for HIV/AIDS" of January 8, 2012 at thenigerianbiomedicalandlifescientists yahoo group 12-13th January 2013

How to Create a Religion

                                             Oluwatoyin Vincent Adepoju

                                                                       Compcros

                                    Comparative Cognitive Process and Systems

              "Exploring Every Corner of the Cosmos in Search of Knowledge"

The recent furore over Islam, bringing to a focus the troubling prominence of the religion since the beginning of the 21^st century, challenges me to reflect on religions as ideologies created by human beings in unusual situations. 

I am intrigued as to how the pronouncements of individuals, the founders of religions, can have such a magnetic and profound influence on countless people across time and space. 

I once argued with a Muslim that the Koran, like all religious texts, is partly a human creation. 

I also stated that the histories of the creation of these texts demonstrate a body of procedures their creators have followed. 

These procedures are quite straightforward.

They often involve physical seclusion for long periods of time.  

During this seclusion, the seeker engages in intense prayer or meditation or both. 

Those who created new religions not only did this, but they sought something different from what already existed. 

Those practising such a discipline within an existing religious framework discovered or created something new within that framework. 

I think that anyone who subjects themselves to the discipline of a Buddha, Muhammad or Jesus can achieve something like what they achieved. 

Another quality the founders of religions shared is that they were totally identified with what they sought. They did not mix their vocations with any other occupation. 

This commitment to their vocation was at times so radical that they had no families, like Jesus and the Buddha. 

I expect a related depth of commitments can be developed but within the context of involvement in social life.

I am interested in the psychology of creating spiritual ideologies or religions as a theoretical study and a practical discipline, something people can learn and practice, helping to develop a more balanced approach to the culture of   divinising religious founders, those whose achievements are made possible by their subjecting themselves to disciplines others are not committed enough to engage in. 

As the world grows, may we not have modern forms of equal depth and novelty for their time of the insights of Buddha, Jesus and Muhammad?

25 September 2012

Religion, the Occult and Philosophy as Central Sources of Inspiration for the Development of Modern Science

Written and posted to online groups on  7 July 2010 

Christianity and Neoplatonic philosophy were central to the Scientific Revolution through the inspiration they gave to the cosmological explorations of Jonannes Kepler,Galileo Galilei and Isaac Newton as well as the occult discipline  of alchemy to the chemical research of Issac Newton.Stephen Hawking,one of the leading figures in modern scientific cosmology,also invokes  explicitly the inspirational relationship  between religious and   scientific cosmology in his  A Brief History of Time,where he explores,among other questions, the subject of gaining  a unified grasp of the fundamental laws of nature, a level of knowledge  he argues would enable human beings understand the mind of God.The point here is,religion, spirituality and the occult can and have  inspired scientific discovery.

Religion and the Occult as Inspiring Science

This does not imply that Hawkins claimed or implied that there  is a scientific basis for belief in God.I  also did  not state that Hawkin's book indicates  that "scientific facts can be gleaned from superstitious beliefs",superstition being what I believe you mean by religion,a 'superstition' you acknowledge,however, a  man of Hawkin's intelligence still considers it relevant to entertain.

What I state was that  "Christianity and Neoplatonic philosophy were central to the Scientific Revolution through the inspiration they gave to the cosmological explorations of Johannes Kepler,Galileo Galilei and Isaac Newton as well as the occult discipline  of alchemy to the chemical research of Issac Newton.Stephen Hawking,one of the leading figures in modern scientific cosmology,also invokes  explicitly the inspirational relationship  between religious and   scientific cosmology in his  A Brief History of Time,where he explores,among other questions, the subject of gaining  a unified grasp of the fundamental laws of nature, a level of knowledge  he argues would enable human beings understand the mind of God.The point here is,religion, spirituality and the occult can and have inspired scientific discovery."

 Note the words emphasized in black. I repeatedly state a relationship between religion and science as one  of inspiration,which is very different from stating that scientists  derive facts, from the study of religion.

Cross Fertilization between Forms of Knowledge

Inspiration  in this context can be described as  a motive force leading to the development of knowledge.The source of inspiration does not have to be an identical form of knowledge as the knowledge it eventually inspires.A form of knowledge can be understood as one of the distinctive categories,with its own distinctive procedures,through which human beings develop,organize and apply knowledge(Paul Hirst, "Liberal Education and the Forms of Knowledge"; "The Forms of Knowledge Revisited";Knowledge and the Curriculum).

Religion is one such form,where faith,imagination and speculative thinking are central.Science is another,where a range of approaches may be employed depending on the individuality of the scientist but where they must ultimately be related to the logical structure and existing body of knowledge constituted by science.

In the light of such a situation,Hawkin might be inspired by a conception of a creator who created the laws that constitute the character of the universe and whose mind would contain a unified understanding of those laws,to explore in scientific terms the unity of those laws,so as to understand the mind of that God.The concept of God is a philosophical and religious concept,reliant on speculation and faith to be upheld.The study of the physical laws of the universe and the unity of those laws,however,is a  scientific  enterprise,which,even though it might derive its inspiration from philosophy and religion,is dependent on the mutually validatable logic of science,operating in relation to known scientific knowledge,even if it tries to revise or overturn that knowledge.

Respective Relationships to the idea of Validation as Distinguishing Religion,Philosophy and Science

Differences in their respective relationships to  validation distinguish science,religion.and philosophy.Validation means proving the actuality of a proposition.A proposition is an assertion about the nature of a phenomenon.Phenomena are anything,concrete or abstract that  can be described.The propositions of religion are often not capable of validation by everyone,regardless of how prepared they might be to validate them.The idea of God can be described as an example of a   phenomenon.The question of whether or not God exists implies  propositions that assert or deny the actuality of the proposition:propositions that state that God exists;that God does not exist;that it is impossible to prove whether God exists or not.All these are possibilities,possible positions emerging from the question as to whether or not God exists.

The proposition that God exists is not one that can be validated by everybody,if it can be validated at  all,beceause even if one agrees that God does exist,it can hardly  be proven or proven conclusively to others.Even if it were possible to prove it for  oneself as some people  claim they have for themselves,it is a delicate issue  whether others can also  do so using the methods that anyone else might have used to prove it for themselves.On account of the difficulty or impossibility, for most,of proving the existence of God and many  other religious postulates,religion often operates more in terms  faith than  in terms of propositions that can be mutually validated.

Philosophy might start from faith in religious ideas, from wonder at the marvels of the universe or from curiosity about its perplexities but could be described as trying to go beyond faith by reasoning about its propositions  and showing how conclusions follow logically through a chain  of reasoning.Even then,as evident from the history of philosophy,not everyone who follows the same chain of reasoning agrees that the conclusions reached necessarily follow from that sequence of reasoning  or even that the method of reasoning is adequate to the task or even that the right question is being  asked in the first place.Validation in philosophy,therefore,is more general and more widely developed than in religion but it is still not mutually binding.

Science,on the other hand,might be inspired by or even use the methods of religion and philosophy but must develop its ideas in terms that can be  validated by anybody who follows the reasoning used to arrive at its conclusions.On account of the need to develop a universally acceptable style of reasoning,science  uses the artificial language called mathematics,which,in  its dominant form demonstrates  a degree of universality developed through centuries from early civilizations to the present.Science also uses experiment,which involves testing propositions to see whether they can be upheld  under precisely  worked out conditions.It is held that anyone who tests those propositions under the  same conditions should get the same result.Science,therefore,operates in terms of a strict  concept of mutual validation.


The Intercourse of Science and Religion in  Isaac Newton's Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy


A superb demonstration of the inspirational relationship between the speculative but not necessarily mutually validatable logic  of philosophy,the speculative logic and faith of religion and the mutually validating aspiration of scientific logic  is Isaac Newton'sMathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy.In this work,described by Newton scholar Richard Westfall as the most important foundational work of modern science,Newton takes the reader through a volume of closely reasoned arguments,using  mathematical  proofs at every step.At the conclusion of the book,however,the Cambridge scholar departs from his mutually validating logic,a logical progression which anybody who takes the time can follow,and possibly even understand fully its mathematical details,and makes statements on relationships between these logical and mathematical  conclusions about the physical laws of the universe,laws that operate throughout the material cosmos,and the creator of the universe,who, as he concludes must be the originator of those laws, which he,Newton,using his mathematical and logical methods,has discovered.

In fact,the concluding section of this book is most instructive in suggesting  how a scientist  may develop scientific  ideas in relation to a non-scientific cosmology,as exemplified by religion and philosophy,beceause Newton goes one to postulate further relationships,beyond gravitational theory, which the book develops, between material bodies and  the cosmic force he attributes to God, but states that he is not able to proceed further to prove the unity of these effects of that cosmic force  using the logical and experimental tools of his scientific discipline: "We are not furnished with  with a sufficiency of experiments to prove these things..."

Newton does not claim to prove that God is the creator of those laws.He merely asserts his faith.In that regard,he shares  a similarity with the German  philosopher Immanuel Kant,whom I understand postulates the value of the idea of God while stating that he cannot prove the existence of God and that efforts to do so so far  are faulty.His religious consciousness,however,  seems to suffuse his work becaeuse he develops a kind of  a kind of religiosity within  the  logical and speculative structures of his philosophy.

Relationships between Theory and Fact in the History of Science and Scientific Methodology

You focused on Hawkin but went so far as to deride the notion of religious ideas inspiring the development of  scientific facts.Your conception is mistaken  on two grounds.It is mistaken  on the grounds of historical accuracy. It is also problematic because  it seems to be based on limited  conception of science as different from its actual practice.  


To take the second one first. Science is not only about fact.It is to a  large degree about theory,which  itself demonstrates a complex relationship to fact.Theories  are  general statements about phenomena, their intrinsic or internal characteristics and the conditions that hold between them.Theories are useful in science because they facilitate the understanding  of relationships among broad groups of phenomena,and indicate  how such relationships enable us to describe and predict  particular instances.The relationship between particular examples that demonstrate a theory can be arrived at through induction or deduction.To deduce is to "infer  (something) about a particular case from a general principle that holds of all such cases".Inductive reasoning is  reasoning  "from a part to the whole,from particulars to generals,or from the individual to the universal".Specific example- "a process of mathematical demonstration in which the validity of a law is inferred from its observed validity in particular cases by proving that if the law holds in a certain case it must hold in the next and therefore in successive cases" (Both  definitions from Webster's Third New International Dictionary)


An example of a theory is Newton's theory of gravitation.Another is Darwin's theory of evolution.Both these conceptions represent  lofty levels of abstract generalization.In the case ofNewton he developed an idea that deals  with the relationships of bodies to each other throughout space   and developed an understanding of the laws   that are demonstrated in such relationships,central to which is the inverse square law  which describes in quantitative,measurable terms,the relationship between gravity,mass and distance.From this theory it is possible to work out gravitational relationships between  the celestial bodies and between artificial forms such as human made satellites  and those natural celestial bodies.

Darwin worked out an idea in relation to biological  developments of animate  species,his theory of evolution.From that theory scientists   are able to work out ideas about particular examples of evolution in specific species.

A fine work on relationships between theory and fact in science is P.B.Medwar,The Art of the Soluble. I also understand that Karl Popper,as in The Logic of Scientific Discovery addresses the subject. Also striking, I am informed, is the more modern James Gleick,Chaos.

  Scientific theory, being abstract and general,has drawn inspiration from bodies of generalisation about the nature of the universe which are not scientific,specifically religion and  the occult.This is because religious cosmology,a description within a religion of the general character of the universe, represents  the earliest and longest existing form of large scale generalization  in many societies.Kepler sums up the relationship between the religious philosophies of Plato and Pythagoras  which understood numbers as the structural foundations of the universe,in its combination with  the theistic Christian characterization  of the creator of the universe,   in stating that "In the beginning,God geometrised".Johannes Kepler,whose work is a turning point  in scientific cosmology,was inspired by an effort to understand the motions of the celestial bodies in terms of the geometric postulates of Platonism,Platonism being a central inspiration to Western philosophy,religion and science(Frances Yates,Giordano Bruno  and the Hermetic Tradition; Alexander Koyre,In Praise of Measurement).Newtonwas not only inspired by the occult practice of alchemy,described by historians of science as the mother of chemistry,his gravitational theory is described by Westfall as being essentially a scientific  transposition of an occult concept-the idea of action at a distance  without visible means of conduction,a basic concept in magic and possibly new in science at that time( "Newton,Isaac", Encyclopaedia Britannica 1992; Isaac Newton  and Never at Rest: A Biography of Isaac Newton)


All in all,Kepler sums up the difference between a completely religious or philosophical approach to the universe and an approach which, though inspired by occult,philosophical or religious ideas,develops its conceptions in terms of mutually validatable scientific logic often represented by mathematics,  in stating that he approached his scientific work in a  spirit  "more gemetrico" (more geometrical) (Yates,Giordano Bruno).

The fact that religion and the occult have inspired Western science has been a  mainstay of modern Western philosophy of science since the work of Frances Yates.The relationship between philosophy and science has always been acknowledged.These philosophies  have  often demonstrated a relationship with religion.

A beautiful modern summation of these relationships between domains of  knowledge in the history and philosophy of science is the work of Tian Yu  Cao,as his Conceptual Developments in Twentieth Century Field Theories.

I would have liked to further develop these points by  addressing the following topics emerging from the critique of Benin Olokun belief and practice [on Nigerian internet groups]  but I don’t seem have the energy for that now:

Basic Cognitive Implications of Benin Olokun Graphic Symbols

       Spatial and Temporal Division and Unity through Geometric Abstraction

Relating Space, Time, Ultimate and Contingent Reality, Ultimate and  Derived Spirit through Geometric Abstraction