degringolade

Lincoln City

Lincoln City Dawn

䷸

In the history of physics, hypotheses non fingo (Latin for "I frame no hypotheses", or "I contrive no hypotheses") is a phrase used by Isaac Newton in the essay General Scholium, which was appended to the second edition of Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica in 1713.

A 1999 translation of the Principia presents Newton's remark as follows:

I have not as yet been able to discover the reason for these properties of gravity from phenomena, and I do not feign hypotheses. For whatever is not deduced from the phenomena must be called a hypothesis; and hypotheses, whether metaphysical or physical, or based on occult qualities, or mechanical, have no place in experimental philosophy. In this philosophy particular propositions are inferred from the phenomena, and afterwards rendered general by induction. (1)

"Qui hypotheses sumunt pro primis speculationum suarum principiis… ingenium possunt forsan formare commentum, at commentum tamen erit."

Those who assume (fetch from) hypotheses as first principles of (the foundation on which they build) their speculations…may indeed form an ingenious romance, but a romance it will still be.

—ROGER COTES,

PREFACE TO SIR ISAAC NEWTON’S

Principia Mathematica,

SECOND EDITION, 1713 (2)

One of the problems with approaching philosophy after years of indoctrination into western science is that it takes as much unlearning as it takes learning. Western science assumes cause and effect everywhere. Philosophy starts further back than that and most western philosophy seems to be bent around the idea that cause and effect is the only way of approaching problems. Right now I am trying to develop a mindset where I don’t assume cause and effect. The best that I have been able to do is try on Jung’s idea of synchronicity, but even then I keep drifting into the cause and effect mindset. I am going to keep trying, but it isn’t easy.

One of the most hated phrases in the hard-core, we are gonna die painfully climate change scientists is the phrase “correlation is not causation”. Their models and Ugo’s (3) beloved World 3 model make the change of the weather an unnecessary by-product of human stupidity. I tend to agree with them across the board, but the truth is that particular model and their apocalyptic predictions are not proof of the upcoming disaster (that is my description and thought) but a statistical guess based on a limited data set and a series of agreed upon presuppositions and constraints. It just seems like a damn fine guess to me.

But correlation is not causation. Another quote is from Jung in his forward to Wilhelm and Bayne’s translation of the I Ching:

The moment under actual observation appears to the ancient Chinese view more of a chance hit than a clearly defined result of concurring causal chain processes. The matter of interest seems to be the configuration formed by chance events in the moment of observation, and not at all the hypothetical reasons that seemingly account for the coincidence.(4)

So right now I am looking at the world and trying to decide which of the three “C’s” (Correlation, Causation, and Coincidence) is dominant at any particular moment. My recent forays into divinatory methodology is probably trying to find a template setting a means to think about just this kind of thing. More and more this seems to be what I have to do for everything I consider. But the more that I consider it, the three terms seem to merge and dance depending on approach and the degree of functionality required by my current mindset.

I suppose that I just need to get used to the phrase: “It depends”.

(1) Yes, I cut and pasted from Wikipedia, so sue me.

(2) I have always strongly recommended Neal Stephenson’s Baroque Cycle (where I first saw this quote) for anyone who enjoys fiction that deals with how science as we know it came about. It is fiction but it is thoughtful. But beware, if you decide you are going to start it, it is three-thousand pages. Don’t say I didn’t warn you

(3) https://senecaeffect.substack.com/

(4) From The I Ching or Book of Changes The Richard Wilhelm Translation rendered into English by Cary F. Baynes Foreword by C. G. Jung Preface to the Third Edition by Hellmut Wilhelm Bollingen Series XIX Princeton University Press © 1950, 1967, renewed 1977