Now mankind is searching the lost wholeness.
Many peoples find wholeness in spirituality in different ways. There are many books which describe the differences between usually scientifically points of view and the "New Thought".
I want to remind of the Dialectics by Hegel
which also expresses a wholeness-view.
1. Analytical method in science?
Hegel need necessarily also synthesis. The mentally breaking
down of wholes into its constituent parts need the reconstituting
a while from its parts. There is not a separation of analysis
and synthesis in stages or in times, but both take part in every
(!) stage of the cognition of a thing. Synthesis
means not only "sum"! Hegel not uses the notion "synthesis",
because in his opinion no separated things unite. By Hegel "synthesis"
is a development in which one thing includes his opposites by
sublating them. Ken Wilber uses other words: First there is a
mush, only a "fusion". Than in this mush some things/aspects
differentiate. They are different aspects in a whole. This
whole emerges by integrating the differentiated aspects/moments:
Fusion , than differentiation and than integration. We must see
that there is not necessarily time between the "than"s.
All being has a structure, in which is all of them: fusion, differentiation
and integration. But all things came into being by this way: dialectical
evolution of arising and resolving of opposites between different
aspects/moments of the whole.
2. Separation of subject and object?
Cognition is always a dialectical relation between subject and object. Hegel´s philosophy tries to explain this relations complete. This leads to the "Absolute". Later Marx related this to the practice. This practice is an important point by Marx, often forgotten by mechanical materialists. Only practice can explain dualism of part- and wave-view of quantum-objects. "Observation" is not a independently looking on, but a manipulating of conditions in practice. Material experiment-conditions determine, if we see parts or waves (this is not accidentally, how much non-scientifical books it describe).
In social science all scientists are concerned
persons. Karlheinz Steinmueller said therefore we must replace
"objectivity" by "Transparency of our requirements,
assumptions and values". In this way we may combine scientific
recognizing of "given things" and change these
things in the same time! (see a text about self-organisation and society).
3. Discrete things against continuos wholeness?
Continuity and Discontinuity refer to the two
aspects of matter manifested in discrete for me or, manifested
in a continuum. Nature exhibits the interchange between continuity
and discontinuity. Matter is in my opinion neither discrete nor
continuos but a unity of the two aspects. Each thing
is a whole - each thing is continuos and discontinuous.
4. Wholeness without contradictions?
Maybe, you like this more than contradictory reality. By Ken Wilber this would be only the "fusion" as a mush. The integrated wholes emerges only through resolving contradictories! Meditation can be an intelligent resolving (Wilber). If it is only forgetting them, the wholeness is a merely transient one.
We have to distinguish the non-dialectic thinking
about contradictions, in which "one proposition cannot both
be true and false at one and the same time", and the dialectic
(hegelian) point of view, in which recognizing of moving contradictions
is recognizing the essence of the thing!
Beyond Hegel we can discuss another Problem:
5. Materialism - Idealism
Please don't confuse dialectical materialism with mechanical materialism. All criticism of "materialism" I knew means only the mechanical materialism.
"Matter" isn't merely "stuff". Matter is a philosophical category (not a thing!), which denotes that which exists outside of and independently of thought.
("Matter" exists only in our minds, because it is a notion! The Unity of all forms of (objective-real being) material things (nature, society, consciousness) is better called "Substance". )
Materialism assert the material word (outside of consciousness) to be primary to thought, especially in relation to the question of the origin (source) of knowledge.
Dialectical materialism differs from mechanical i.e. in the question of things and processes. Dialectics emphasizes processes, not "things" as "solids".
(If I use the word "thing"
I mean it in the sense of "processing area of material world
with - only for it - typical characteristics").
There is also a difference between "object" and "matter" and "subject" and "thought". The doing of the subject can create and change material conditions (i.e. for quantum-objects). No physicist says that thought influences quantum-things (how spirituals often interpret). Thinking of physicist determines his doing as subject. But the result of his doing (preparation of experiment) are material things (which gaps in the famous gap-experiments). These material things interact with material quantum-things, and we see particles or waves. There "is" not a trajectory of quantum-things. It doesn't exist! Quantum-things have other characteristics as macro-world-things. If we confuse this, we expect "trajectories" ho from great particles and if we can't see them, we wonder... It is the same that we can't "see" the SPIN of electrons on planets or the quantum-characteristic "CHARME" from quarks on flowers.
All talk about quantum-vagueness is not a proof
of idealism. The vagueness is a objective characteristic
of quantum-things, it needn't human or other spirit/thought.
The Einstein-Rosen-Prodolsky-Paradoxon is also a usually misunderstanding. The ERP shows that there not exist "hidden parameter" (to explain quantum-characteristics) and nothing others.
The "new" knowledge about quantum-vacuum-fields shows common characteristics of the material world. It is not new that all is connected with all. Dialectic is talking about all-connectedness. At least in evolution all was connected with something others. Our atoms and quants became into being in connected processes...
But it doesn't help me, that the electrons
or quarks in my body or brain are connected with all electrons
or quarks in the universe. It doesn't help me to life as human,
to create and do something in our world. If I want to feel the
Unity of all, I needn't know about quantum-field. And I have not
consolation to know that after my death my atoms would be within
the quantum-vacuum-field again.
(I often use the English words of Andy Blunden
from his Glossary.Thank
Also refer to