Facts and the Scientific World Picture
101
independent of the human mind. However, when speaking of the motion
of the moon in its orbit, the word “motion” refers to the particular sensation of
visual flow produced in the mind by a dedicated module of the brain, because
that sensation is what physical motion is.
“Not at all!”, one may object, “the sensation is the brain’s way of representing
an external process, and that external process is what motion really is.” Well,
there is indeed an external process which acts on us and causes our visual system
to detect motion. However, that external process cannot be called motion,
because when we speak of motion we are referring to a specific sensation that is
perceived as a flow or drift over a brief interval of time. It is entirely dependent
on the faculty of perceiving the world in Gestalt wholes—whole regions of
space and (in this case) whole intervals of time. That progressive flow does not
correspond to physical motion, which has a fixed value at each instantaneous
point in time. The word “motion” refers to a feeling induced in us when our
senses are affected in a certain way by an external physical process.
No doubt important things are going on in our solar system: But from a
general, or universal perspective it cannot be said that those things consist of
planets circling a sun and moons circling planets. Indeed, talk of suns, moons
and orbits pertains to a specific description of the solar system based on man’s
scheme of segmentation. It is not unreasonable to suppose that there may
be other kinds of articulate beings, in the vast immensity of the universe, for
whom reality is carved differently, and whose concepts have no translation into
ours. They might conceive of a solar system in categories quite different from
ours, yet their account may be no less faithful to reality than ours.
The philosopher Nelson Goodman presents a similar perspective in his lively
little book entitled Ways of Worldmaking. He refers to different schemes of individuation as different versions of reality. He agrees that terms such as “motion”,
“orbit”, “circular” and so on flow out of a particular way of segmenting reality, and therefore express a perspective restricted to one particular version. He
claims these terms do not stand for real things in mind-independent reality.
Goodman suggests there may be an underlying Ground Reality out of which
all versions of reality are derived. If so, this original Reality would have no
planets, no motion, no spacetime, no relations, no points—no structure at
all. He describes such a reality in terms of a “cookie-cutter” metaphor: Reality
independent of the mind is the dough, and our conceptual scheme is the
shape of the cookie-cutter. Goodman concludes with the pessimistic view
that a reality without objects or structure serves no purpose. In other words,
for Goodman, the mind-independent, or pre-animate world has no value.
Everything of value in the world comes from what’s added by minds.
101
independent of the human mind. However, when speaking of the motion
of the moon in its orbit, the word “motion” refers to the particular sensation of
visual flow produced in the mind by a dedicated module of the brain, because
that sensation is what physical motion is.
“Not at all!”, one may object, “the sensation is the brain’s way of representing
an external process, and that external process is what motion really is.” Well,
there is indeed an external process which acts on us and causes our visual system
to detect motion. However, that external process cannot be called motion,
because when we speak of motion we are referring to a specific sensation that is
perceived as a flow or drift over a brief interval of time. It is entirely dependent
on the faculty of perceiving the world in Gestalt wholes—whole regions of
space and (in this case) whole intervals of time. That progressive flow does not
correspond to physical motion, which has a fixed value at each instantaneous
point in time. The word “motion” refers to a feeling induced in us when our
senses are affected in a certain way by an external physical process.
No doubt important things are going on in our solar system: But from a
general, or universal perspective it cannot be said that those things consist of
planets circling a sun and moons circling planets. Indeed, talk of suns, moons
and orbits pertains to a specific description of the solar system based on man’s
scheme of segmentation. It is not unreasonable to suppose that there may
be other kinds of articulate beings, in the vast immensity of the universe, for
whom reality is carved differently, and whose concepts have no translation into
ours. They might conceive of a solar system in categories quite different from
ours, yet their account may be no less faithful to reality than ours.
The philosopher Nelson Goodman presents a similar perspective in his lively
little book entitled Ways of Worldmaking. He refers to different schemes of individuation as different versions of reality. He agrees that terms such as “motion”,
“orbit”, “circular” and so on flow out of a particular way of segmenting reality, and therefore express a perspective restricted to one particular version. He
claims these terms do not stand for real things in mind-independent reality.
Goodman suggests there may be an underlying Ground Reality out of which
all versions of reality are derived. If so, this original Reality would have no
planets, no motion, no spacetime, no relations, no points—no structure at
all. He describes such a reality in terms of a “cookie-cutter” metaphor: Reality
independent of the mind is the dough, and our conceptual scheme is the
shape of the cookie-cutter. Goodman concludes with the pessimistic view
that a reality without objects or structure serves no purpose. In other words,
for Goodman, the mind-independent, or pre-animate world has no value.
Everything of value in the world comes from what’s added by minds.