|
|
 |
Science vs. witchcraft
August 14, 2001
by John Pugsley
Originally published in The Sovereign Individual, June 2001
Gerard Piel, editor of Scientific American, once noted: “The most remarkable discovery made by scientists is science itself.”
The remarkable discovery Piel referred to is the ‘scientific method’—the discovery that the nature of the world around us could be revealed through observation, hypothesis, and the objective testing of each hypothesis. It has become normal procedure in all of the physical sciences.
In medicine, for example, a disease is observed, an hypothesis suggested as to the cause and possible cure. Then comes the most important step: the hypothesis is tested under rigidly controlled conditions in an attempt to disprove it. Subjects are divided into two groups; controls and those on which the cure will be tested. Control subjects are given placebos while other test subjects the actual treatments. To eliminate bias of either the subject or administrator, tests must be “double-blind” so that neither the subjects nor those administering the treatments know which subjects are getting the real treatment and which are getting the placebos.
The scientific method has been phenomenally successful. In the 400-plus years since its discovery it has catapulted mankind out of grinding poverty and disease and into a futuristic world of longevity, abundance and leisure.
During these same four centuries in which science has subdued the plagues of nature, political scientists have pursued cures for mankind’s social ills. To these scientists unending irritation, they have been singularly unsuccessful in ameliorating any of the societal problems, and in particular have had almost no affect on the more pernicious catastrophes of war, crime and political upheaval. The reason all political scientists have failed down through history is because in spite of their claim to be scientists they aren’t practicing science at all; they are practicing witchcraft.
Both science and witchcraft aim to change the course of future events. Scientists study nature and seek ways to achieve their goals consistent with nature’s laws. Witch doctors assume their own powers are so great that nature will follow their dictates: they don’t hypothesize about how nature works, but rather how it ought to work
Karl Marx was a such a witch doctor. He was certain that his design for a communist society would result in a perfect world. No double-blind studies were needed. Lenin and the Bolsheviks imposed Marx’s nostrums by force, annihilating 62 million people in a vain attempt to subvert their human nature. Witch doctor Mao Tse-tung imposed his variation of Marx’s hypothesis, once again without testing, at a cost of 35 million lives. Witch doctor Adolph Hitler imposed his will for Aryan supremacy on a gullible nation, destroying Germany and 21 million people in the process.
In the entire history of mankind none of the political witch doctors ever considered using the scientific method to test their hypotheses before imposing them on the population, nor have they learned from their failures.
Today’s political witch doctors, both those who pontificate political science at the world’s most prestigious universities, and their counterparts who dispense their social medicines through government, remain convinced their witchcraft is so powerful that no testing is necessary. When was the last time you heard a politician propose to scientifically test a new social program before it was imposed on the nation? Have any of the political scientists you read about proposed a double-blind test of gun control laws? Or a scientific test of the effects of drug legalization? Or an objective study to determine what the long-term effects of minimum wage laws or tariffs? Or a double-blind test of de-regulation of industry? Or a test of systems of taxation such as a flat tax, or a sales tax, or a repeal of all taxes?
Think about it. Shouldn’t anyone claiming the title of political scientist demand double-blind tests of any program he or she proposes, including taxation versus no taxation, of regulation versus free markets, of individual liberty versus state control of personal choice?
In truth, such tests have been accomplished surreptitiously, without the sanction of, endorsement by, or acknowledgement of the witch-doctor establishment. By every measure and wherever comparisons are made, the level of prosperity, peace and progress is always directly proportional to the level of freedom enjoyed by individuals. All historical evidence supports the conclusion that there is an causal relationship between the level of state plunder and the level of production, and between the power of the state and the prosperity of the population.
Scientist Jacob Bronowski in his small book, Magic, Science, and Civilization, said: “There has been an irreversible step in the cultural evolution of man; it took place at the beginning of the scientific revolution…and it will never be undone.” It will not be undone, and eventually it will be applied to disprove the erroneous belief that a perfect society can be created by witchcraft rather than science.
Some 200 years after the “remarkable discovery” the Marquis de Condorcet, a French philosopher and mathematician, recognized the inevitable triumph of science over witchcraft. In 1794, as he awaited the guillotine, he wrote: “The time will therefore come when the sun will shine only on free men who know no other master but their own reason; when tyrants and slaves, priests and their stupid or hypocritical instruments will exist only in works of history and on the stage; and when we shall think of them only to pity their victims and their dupes.”
The path to a world in which science finally defeats witchcraft and in which all individuals are sovereign is a long one, but that mankind will tread that path is inevitable.
Click here for more information.
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
