On Informatics Approaches to Overcoming Natural Science Crisis ^†

Abstract

Husserl told readers that there are two ways to understand his theory, namely “starting from the world of life” or “starting from psychology”. We believe that theoretical informatics and information philosophy can be combined with the Husserl phenomenological movement as two important options to overcome the crisis of contemporary natural science. The purposes of this article are to analyze the ontological and epistemological roots of the scientific “crisis”; to criticize the one-sidedness of the mainstream of Western science and philosophy over the past 2300 years; to develop and perfect the foundation and core of information science: “theoretical informatics”; to apply the experience of “Information Psychology” to the “discipline informatization” in Law, Ethics, Linguistics, etc.; and to abstract information ontology, epistemology, and axiology based on theoretical informatics.

1. Introduction

We believe that the two main achievements (theoretical informatics and information psychology) of Huaguang Academy of Information Science at Wuhan (abbreviated as Huaguang Academy) and Husserl’s two “approaches” (life world and psychology) advocated by his “The Crisis of European Science and Transcendental Phenomenology” agree without prior consultation for solving the scientific “crisis”.

Husserl pointed out that philosophy is the overall grasp of the “beings” in the universe. As a “branch” of philosophy, modern science has made brilliant progress, but at the same time, it has generated a “crisis” in science, that is, “losing its significance for life”. Due to the fact that natural science only uses quantitative and formulaic methods to study the “material” objects in the living world, the essence of the “non-material” abstract “self” in the living world, and the “thinking life” of the self, the foundation and achievements of the ideological labor that distinguishes humans from animals have been “forgotten” by natural science. The achievements in these areas should have been revealed by psychology, but because the development of psychology is controlled by the quantitative and formulaic models of natural science, researchers have attempted to establish “psycho-physics”, and they have been completely unable to comprehend the essence of subjectivity and establish “pure psychology”.

Husserl insisted that he did not deny the reality of the world, but advocated a thorough Platonic idealism and would never retreat. He told readers that there are two ways to understand his theory, namely “starting from the life world” or “starting from psychology” [1]. We believe that “theoretical informatics” is the foundation and theoretical core of the entire information science and a bridge to information philosophy; we can combine Husserl’s phenomenological movement from a scientific perspective and take theoretical informatics and information philosophy as two important options to overcome the crisis of contemporary natural science.

2. The Primary Purpose of This Article Is to Analyze the Ontological and Epistemological Roots of the Scientific “Crisis”

The mainstream ontology, epistemology, and axiology of Western philosophy are all based on Aristotle’s “physics”, which is completely Aristotle’s philosophical thinking about “physicalism” after resisting and criticizing Plato’s idealism and achieving success. So far, this is still the mainstream Western philosophy, commonly known as “Anglo-American philosophy”. Therefore, European philosophers who inherited Plato’s idealism, such as Husserl, were certainly marginalized by British and American philosophers; their research on human nature, self, subjectivity, and rationality has naturally not expanded. Scholars at Huaguang Academy believe that the more serious scientific “crisis” lies in the fact that the “mainstream” of philosophy, Humanities, and social sciences over the centuries has been misled and distorted by the “scientific outlook”, worldview, and methodology of physicalism, all of which have deviated from their correct direction and path. For example, mainstream psychologists since W.Wundt have used quantitative and formulaic methods to study the material processes of psychological phenomena, competing with “biologists”, “brain scientists”, and “neuroscientists” to seize research fields that originally belonged to others, whereas Brentano and his successors, who adhered to the correct research direction, have been “marginalized” until today.

We believe that the “scientific crisis” in Europe has not been lifted, and it is still a global crisis in contemporary natural science. This is actually the crisis of the entire “Western philosophy”, as well as its ontology, epistemology, and axiology. This crisis cannot and has not been resolved automatically after the development of information technology, the popularization of information products, and the rise of the information industry. Because of the changes in “thinking inertia” and “institutional inertia” in people’s physicalist “scientific outlook”, world view and methodology require an “ideological enlightenment” and “strategic transformation” of the entire human thinking mode. We must work hard at the levels of “information science” and “information philosophy” in order to compete with and even replace the “dominant” position of “physicalism” in its “scientific outlook”, world view, and methodology. Only then can the zeitgeist of “Informationism” in the information age be popularized and promoted.

3. Setting Things Right: Criticizing the One-Sidedness of the Mainstream of Western Science and Philosophy over the Past 2300 Years

How can we shake the “traditional thinking mode”, which has been the mainstream in Western science and philosophy for over 2300 years? We believe that an effective approach can be to overthrow Aristotle’s criticism of Plato’s “theory of ideas” and return the theory of ideas to “innocence”. First, we should “study Plato” and then use information science to reinterpret the “theory of ideas”. We feel that in the face of powerful “positivist” science and philosophy, Husserl’s predecessors and successors inherited Plato’s tradition, which was very implicit and gentle. Now, with the overwhelming and unstoppable light of the spirit of the information era, we can be more frank, straightforward, complete, and thorough.

In a strict sense, Plato’s “Idealism” is not a monistic “idealism” at all because his “realist” propositions of “the sun metaphor”, “the line metaphor”, and “the cave metaphor” regarding “the idea” in “The Republic” are binary, namely “the visible world” and “the known world”, that is, the existence of the universe can be “divided into two parts”: “material being” and “immaterial being” (i.e., information) [2]. The flesh of Plato and Aristotle has long been hard to trace, but they have pioneered the path to science and philosophy; for more than 2300 years, humans have repeatedly published their “Complete Works”, offered courses in “Ancient Greek”, copied, inherited, and developed their ideas without questioning their class origins and political positions, to this day! We even believe that from the standpoint of “anthropology”, denying the existence of ideas, refusing to recognize their recording, supervision, and control of ideas, and opposing the special importance of ideas may have an “anti-human” tendency if they were not amateurs in “idealism”.

Regarding the study and interpretation of Plato, we have proposed and are already implementing a specific plan to recognize the “scientific nature” of natural science, supplement and modify the traditional “scientific outlook”, and modify the formula of “science = natural science” since the industrial era to read “science = natural science + information science”; establish and improve the “information science” that stands side by side with the “natural science”, and end the dominance of the “physicalism” with the “informationism” thinking mode. If such an “enlightenment movement” and “strategic transformation” in the history of human thought are initiated, it can be considered as ending the tradition of the mainstream contemporary Western science and philosophy, thereby opening the research stage of “post Western” science and philosophy, or a historical period. “Academic research” is not a “political stand”; we should rightfully criticize the “physics envy” and “quantitative plot” in the Humanities and social sciences; our goal is to usher in a new era of scientific and philosophical development with Chinese characteristics and world significance. Only in this way can the entire Humanities and social sciences have the capital and confidence to compete with the natural sciences.

4. Developing and Perfecting the Foundation and Core of Information Science: “Theoretical Information Science”

Although many scholars claim to be researchers of “information science,” most truly serious scientists and philosophers believe that “there is only information technology, not information science.” People have asked, in addition to borrowing microelectronics and mathematical logic from physics, where is the “scientificity” of information science? In the entire field of information technology, only “communication theory” is quantitative, formulaic, mathematical, and scientific. According to the “scientific outlook” of natural science, we cannot but acknowledge the rationality of the above analysis and conclusions today. Because of that, in the eyes of physicalists, there is nothing in the world except matter and the movement of matter. When we speak, it is sound waves; watching TV is electromagnetic waves; the dictionary is paper and ink. Where is “information”? Show me, please! This physicalist mode of thinking is completely consistent with the “experience” and “common sense” of ordinary people. 2300 years ago, Aristotle criticized Plato. Even if he moved to the present day, it is still “correct” according to common sense and convention, and it can still be accepted by the majority of social members.

The key to the problem lies here. Physicism advocates that what people see with the naked eye; matter and its motion is the “object” of science; other “beyond natural things”, “beyond human experience”, and “prior to human experience” are nonsense, and are “unscientific”, “pseudoscientific”, or even “anti-scientific”. However, idealism and informatics claim that our intelligent human beings not only create an artificial “material world” but also create an artificial “conceptual world”, such as Euclidean geometry, abstract algebra, legal knowledge systems, “unified textbooks” for universities, middle schools, and primary schools, and books from the National Library. These two “artificial worlds” can exist independently of us humans, and their “objectivity” is not transferred by our subjective will!

After the development of natural science, human society has developed the Internet and smartphones. We now need science about the “world of ideas” or the information world even more. So, according to the requirements of the traditional philosophy of science, what are the necessary and sufficient conditions for determining the existence of an “information science”? First, it should have research objects that are different from those of the natural sciences. Second, it should have its own specific research methods. Third, it should have its own independent research paradigms. Fourth, it should have a self-consistent, sufficient, and complete knowledge system. Fifth, it should have practical use and practical value. In the history of scientific development, a new discipline usually takes several years, decades, or even decades from “think of” to “achieve”.

If the method of physics is to quantitatively and formulaically describe the motion trajectory of “objects,” then the method of informatics is to logically and programmatically describe the evolution path of “ideas”. Using artificial “concepts” as nodes, a “discourse system” is logically formulated, and an “academic system” is programmatically formulated using this discourse system. Then, a “disciplinary system” is composed of several organically linked academic systems. For example, philosophy = ontology + epistemology + axiology. Ontology = Platonic idealistic ontology + Aristotle’s metaphysical ontology + Christian God ontology + physical material ontology + theoretical informatics ontology. The term set of information ontology = material + information + existence + phenomena + world + life +….

Before the emergence of “theoretical informatics”, the “disciplines” in the field of information science acted independently and dominated the mountain, and almost all of them suffered from “discipline arrogance”. It is theoretical informatics, which has found the common concepts, principles, and methods of all information science disciplines and is classified according to “basic informatics” and “domain informatics”. Among them, basic informatics is “communication”, “control”, “computing”, and “robotics” (AI); domain informatics is “natural”, “social”, and “humanistic”. Theoretical informatics is the “tool” or “intermediary” of all “discipline informatization” movements. It can connect domain informatics (such as theoretical psychology and legal informatics); it can connect information philosophy; it can also guide the integration of information science and natural science for explaining nature, society, and thinking.

5. Applying the Experience of “Information Psychology” to the “Discipline Informatization” in Law, Ethics, Linguistics, etc.

We believe that the research objects of Humanities and social sciences, such as psychology, law, ethics, and linguistics, are not material, but informational, that is, personal or social information. In recent centuries, under the guidance of physicalism, these disciplines have actually been “materialized”, and now a reverse process is required, namely “discipline informatization”. In the third part of “General Introduction: On Subject Informatization under the Guidance of Worldview and Methodology of Information Science” in “Information Psychology: Background, Essentials, and Applications”, we summarized the “Basic Process of Guiding Psychological Informatization by Worldview and Methodology of Information Science”; the fourth part is “Information psychology provides a useful reference for the informatization of natural sciences and Humanities and social sciences.” [3]. If this is just a “prophecy”, then our predictions were repeatedly and ceaselessly “confirmed”when Li Zongrong was at Huazhong University of Science and Technology and he collaborated with Professor Tang Yongzhong of the Law School to write “The Experience of Information Psychology and the Conception of ‘Discipline Informatization’ in Law” [4] and “An Outline of Informationism Law” [5]; he collaborated with Dr. Yuan Hui of the School of Philosophy to write “Information Psychology from the Perspective of Kantian Ethics—An Exploration of Integrating Natural Science and Humanities and Social Sciences” [6]; he collaborated with professors Liu Genhui and Luo Lin from the Humanities College to write “The Enlightenment of Humboldt Linguistics for the Study of “Information Linguistics”, “The Status and Role of Material, Information, and Human Language”, and ”’Movement’ and Reflection on Animal Matter and Animal Information”; he collaborated with professors Chen Shaohua from the School of Journalism and Chen Jianwei from the School of Foreign Languages to write “The Mathematical Theory of Communication and the Information Science of Communication” [7].

Some scholars do not believe that the research results of the Humanities and social sciences have the ability to “predict”, which is understandable, but does not conform to actual facts. As for the accuracy of the “predictive power” of the Humanities and social sciences, it may not be as high as that of physics, chemistry, or biology. Due to space limitations, the detailed scenarios and specific gains of cross-research between theoretical informatics and law, ethics, linguistics, etc. will not be discussed here.

6. Abstracting Information Ontology, Epistemology, and Axiology Based on Theoretical Informatics

We argue that to criticize Aristotle’s “Meta-Physics” and prove the rationality of the theory of ideas, it is necessary to establish “Meta-Informatics”; establish and develop “information epistemology” and “information value theory”; criticize the information philosophy of “physicalism”; adhere to the concept of two worlds, two facts, two experiences, two rationality, and two positivism; and establish an “information philosophy” of “informationism”.

We believe that “ontology” is a concept of the “genus”, and Aristotle’s “metaphysics” is a concept of the “species”, which is an academic school of ontology. Looking at the history of global philosophy, there is Plato’s ontology, Aristotle’s ontology, Christian ontology, physical ontology, and informatics ontology.

The above is our “mental journey” since encountering Plato’s idealism, our work in establishing and developing theoretical information science, promoting the “scientific outlook”, worldview, and methodology of theoretical informatics, and our current efforts in the direction of “information philosophy”. Our goal is to explain Plato’s theory of ideas with an “information science” (not information technology and information engineering), which has not been widely recognized by academia and society, and to enrich a knowledge system called “information philosophy” in the process of understanding Husserl’s “phenomenology of transcendence”. As Husserl said, the goals of science and philosophy are consistent. We believe that the goal of scientists and philosophers working together to achieve the “ideological enlightenment” of the zeitgeist of “Informatism” and the “strategic transformation” of the thinking mode of information science and information philosophy will surely be achieved!