The possibility for, and consequences of, conceptual revolutions in science and society are far more closely coupled than we generally acknowledge. It is quite probably a matter of the autonomous self-propagation of social (and cognitive) systems that they perform implicit self-censoring functions regarding unexpected novelty and change. Those facts and conceptual frameworks which gain broader leverage and recognition are generally the median translations or poorly-understood half-truths and ambiguous portrayal of foundational shifts in human knowledge.

To what extent does the active abbreviation of homeostatic self-regulation intrinsic to human social and psychological computation actively suppress or restrict (not only the cultivation of new modes of thought but also) the broader dissemination and uptake of those ideas when they do arise ? Does the social (and psychological) context of science and technology fundamentally inhibit the free exploration and development of new modes of thought ?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.