Article/Lecture
No. 76
Author Admin / 2017-11-17
Subject
14. What is Money?

What is money?

 

Control by community of economy, politics, and science
Like industry, of a nation, between nations, is controlled by markets, science is also
influenced by its controls; but, we have to know how difficult economic market is not
easy to be defined, especially in international level. Most of scientists are not easy to
conduct their research activities according to pure interests and motivations of those, not
related to any rewards, punishment, and/or economic or political purposes. If a scientist
mention great achievement, responsibility, and challenge of his or her own works, he or
she most likely has certain purposes and/or is affected by certain controls (which he or
she does not reject). Also, with respect to ethical judgement, these types of scientists'
activities may be justified in explainable ways, without harsh criticism. For examples, our
food crisis promotes scientists to study GMO which raises controversial disputes, but,
the scientists can still conduct their works with presumable good payments.
We might say it does not matter whatever control and influence of our scientific activities
are, however, if we look through all the technologies and products which we depend on
and are using, such as many different types of power generating plants, cell phone,
computer, and others, it is not easy to disregard those effects. Another reason for us to
have to keep eye on those controls of our scientific works, is that our scientific works
which are influenced by certain conditions or controls will come back to affect the
conditions and controls which previously influenced the works, which we already
discussed in the contingency science section. Those controls may be personal interests
(from pure fun and problems solving motivation to reward with cash), education system,
industry, and political purposes. As contingencies (condition, need, environment) and
scientific activities proceed to the next stages, the control factors, after many influences
from the results, will get more entangled with other factors, thus, it may be difficult to
distinguish a single control from the others.
Behaviors of scientists are controlled or influenced by various aspects, including
personal condition, education, economy, and politics. Scientists are motivated, like other
labors, by incentives with cash reward, fame and honor, and also punishment
(negatively). Even though all these may be effective reinforcers, but, in the long run,
these can not be sustainably effective reinforcers (or feed forwards). Education supports
contemporary economic, cultural, and political ideologies and those practices, with its
system and specially designed contents; it never stresses any importance of perished
cultures or nations or tribes. Thus, newly designed and innovated system and contents
of education are believed needed for renovation and revolution of a old community or
nation. As for others, economy is one of most influencing factors or controllers with
scientist activities, scientists, under different economic systems condition, are anticipate
to have different motivation, purpose, and need of their scientific acts. If dominating
industry of a community or a country is IT or biology, the scientists or becoming scientists
(i.e., students) are willing to study popular fields among IT or biological industrial
divisions, respectively, so that they can relatively easily obtain fairly high personal wealth
and social fame through contributions. However, what if you know you are doing some
scientific works to make lots of greedy consumers keep their excessive usages of the
corresponding products? Do you think you can still have high motivation under this
condition, simply with physical reward? Unfortunately, the entangled economic situations
around scientists in the modern societies are not simple to understand, but, too complex
to find specific factors and combination of those, to influence scientists. That's why we
have to know present economic situations and facing problems of our nation and the
other world, along with key economic theories and problem solving strategies.
The last control factor of scientific behaviors is politics; everyone think it is so, but, no
scientist seems to acknowledge his or her scientific research has political purpose or is
controlled consciously or unconsciously by the government or international organizations
or any political ideology. In academic universities and research institutes of which major
activities are scientific, when they are asked (not officially) what most painful stresses
are, they may say it is raising funds to both perform their researches and support
students or researchers (feeling of fear). They also looks believe a (any kind of) power
from political relations is one of key factors to increase possibility to raise research
funds.
With all these, we should understand all the surrounding controls around us, in the
scientific activity world, which is also one of our culture. We also have to understand we
have contributed and will contribute to make contents of the culture, through our acts/
behaviors, and relations to other scientists and persons in other fields. The culture again
controls and influences us with scientific activity (more importantly for personality
formation) in return.
Ethical Action
Hegel (1770-1831) defined, in his book of "Phenomenology of Spirit (1807)", the
consciousness as immediate existence of spirit that contains the two moments, firstly,
knowing, and secondly, the objectivity negative to knowing. Knowing is kind of action for
knowledge, thus, should be scientific action for scientist; actually, we have discussed this
so many times in this book. A highlight of his definition is the second, the negation to the
action of knowing, which is clearly different concept from antithesis of the famous
dialectic method. Negation for consciousness does not intend to make opposite
proposition to a thesis, but, wants to ask objectivity of the knowing action for knowledge,
with positive negativity.
The consciousness of a scientist never comes out, without action of the scientist;
scientists' actions convert realities in Nature into scientific substances and
consciousness, based on their individual characters and spirit, which is what we already
discussed in previous sections. Explicit reality is transferred to implicit substance,
through analysis followed by synthesis (i.e., actions), and to concept, by individuality of a
scientist. The individuality of a scientist is combination of his/her experiences, obtained
knowledge, and influences for him/her from family, community, country, and many others.
Thus, individuality is not solely separate character of the scientist, but, all the
combinations of all things surrounding the scientists, which can be denoted as plurality.
The scientist plurality is all the combinations of knowledge and relations, which enable
the scientist to have his own personality. Now, by looking all the actions of a scientist,
with respect to transforming reality to substance, further to concept(s), and subsequent
scientific judgment (we discuss later), we can see his/her personality as scientist. This
personality is defined as ethics of the scientist, and the action conducted by the scientist
is ethical action. The ethics and actions of the scientist are all from personality, based on
plurality and relations, thus, all these are governed by a human law; the human law may
be controversy with true or false judgment for different individualities and corresponding
personalities. Human law may be different even for different family, community, city,
country, and nations, thus, even with scientific fields, from time to time, we have to
debate with certain substances and accidents. Then, we need an universal law which
may judge the human law of interest to decide true or false, for the debate, but, the
universal law has to be based on simplicity (to be universal), with respect to time
(succession in time, causality within time, and others) and space (reciprocity concept
and etc). Universal law for natural science is Nature Law with regards to science, in all
judgment points of views. There is divine law above universal law, which is beyond
scientific discussion scope, but, I personally we have to keep this in our minds whenever
we make our concepts and do judgment as natural scientist. One conclusion may be
wrong, according to a divine law, even if all the judgment about a substance, concept,
and related action(s) tell it is true, based on ethics of a certain community.
Let's take a few example to think our ethics with the classmate. (1) I am not sure we
have anyone among who in this class or reader is vegetarian. What do you think if I
would say eating animals is not helpful direction towards some concepts related to
harmonic and dynamic interactions between human and other animals? The second
question is whether animals, not human, have soul and spirit. Please recall this class or
this book is about science not about other philosophical or religious areas or arts. (2) If
we use modification of human genes to cure an incurable disease, is the method
adopted scientifically ethnical? What do you think? The reason why I ask you is people
(even scientists opposing) seem to believe it is only due to ethics problems rather than to
connect their opposition to some scientific reasons (not through afterward results, but
with prepositioning logics). (3) We may take more sensitive issue of water, say
Developments project of 4 major rivers.
With natural science, we defined ethics and ethical actions of scientists as pluralized
personality and its actions to convert natural objects to implicit substances, to concepts
through understanding, and to judge (beyond experience, but using reason). Mere
thought type of substance is transformed into actual existences, and specific individuality
into essentiality, by the ethical actions and alienation (externalization) of individuality
within a community. Combinations of all realities, actualities, and essentiality envisioned
and produced by the ethical actions in a community (small or big) can be further defined
as Culture of the community (i.e., scientific culture).
Here is one example, there is an asteroid called 99942 Apophis, having 46 million
tons and 1,600 feet wide, is supposed to approach our planet in 2029. NASA said there
is a chance for the asteroid to strike the earth, with probability of 1 in 250,000, but, a
Chinese research said the probability would be much higher if the asteroid is under the
influence of a gravitational keyhole. With this asteroid, if it is more far away from our
planet than the present situation thus no one noticed that except a few astronomers and
sky watchers, it is simply an object. But, now it is converted to a substance which got
many attentions and may be related to the Earth fate (Definition of substance; action to
convert the object to the subject was taken by related scientists). But, we may think
cultures of different communities and countries may differ. Some countries, like US, and
some communities within the country are very interested in the presence and its travel
trajectory of the asteroid, while, most of people of some countries may not know even 

existence of the object. It is difference of scientific culture. 

File