it is almost impossible to think of a new idea which is different from all the
ideas that have been thought of before and yet that agrees with all the
observations that have already been made. And so if you get anything new
from anyone, anywhere, you welcome it, and you do not argue about why
the other person says it is so.

“Many sciences have not developed this far, and the situation is the way it
was in the early days of physics, when there was a lot of arguing because
there were not so many observations. I bring this up because it is
interesting that human relationships, if there is an independent way
of judging truth, can become unargumentative.

“Most people find it surprising that in science there is no interest in the
background of the author of an idea or in his motive in expounding it. You
listen, and if it sounds like a thing worth trying, a thing that could be tried,
is different, and is not obviously contrary to something observed before, it
gets exciting and worthwhile. You do not have to worry about how long he
has studied or why he wants you to listen to him. In that sense it makes no
difference where the ideas come from. Their real origin is unknown; we call
it the imagination of the human brain, the creative imagination—it is
known; it is just one of those “oomphs.”

“It is surprising that people do not believe that there is imagination in
science. It is a very interesting kind of imagination, unlike that of the
artist. The great difficulty is in trying to imagine something that you have
never seen, that is consistent in every detail with what has already been
seen, and that is different from what has been thought of; furthermore, it
must be definite and not a vague proposition. That is indeed difficult.

“Incidentally, the fact that there are rules at all to be checked is a kind of
miracle; that it is possible to find a rule, like the inverse square law of
gravitation, is some sort of miracle. It is not understood at all, but it leads
to the possibility of prediction—that means it tells you what you would
expect to happen in an experiment you have not yet done.

“It is interesting, and absolutely essential, that the various rules of science
be mutually consistent. Since the observations are all the same

Feynman’s Lecture
Introduction

UnCommon Sense Library Volume II
TrustMark 2001 by Timothy Wilken

22

observations, one rule cannot give one prediction and another rule another
prediction. Thus, science is not a specialist business; it is completely
universal. I talked about the atoms in physiology; I talked about the atoms
in astronomy, electricity, chemistry. They are universal; they must be
mutually consistent. You cannot just start off with a new thing that
cannot be made of atoms.

“It is interesting that reason works in guessing at the rules, and the rules,
at least in physics, become reduced. I gave an example of the beautiful
reduction of the rules in chemistry and electricity into one rule, but there
are many more examples.”5
—Richard Feynman¹⁹⁶³

Nothing to do with where it came from

Richard Feynman gets us off to a good start. In the following chapters, I will be
presenting the work of a number of scientists who are not famous and who do not fill
the history books. Their scientific works are little known and mostly unrecognized.
And, I will also be presenting some original scientific work of my own.

My work and that of these other unknown scientists will be presented in context with
with the work of better known and more recognized scientists. I realize that this
places us in exceptionalcompany.

It may seem presumptuous to mix unknown work with that of well known and
established scientists. However as Feynman says, “We have a way of checking
whether an idea is correct or not that has nothing to do with where it came from. We
simply test it against observation.”

Later

Scientific theory believed to be true today will be improved or shown to be incomplete
later. Newton’s scientific theories, published in 1687, formed the scientific basis for
the Industrial Revolution. Thought to be absolute “laws of Nature”, they were shown
to be incomplete by Einstein’s scientific theories published in 1915. Einstein was not
necessarily smarter than Newton. He was simply later.

⁵Richard P. Feynman, THE MEANING OF IT ALL, 1998, ibid

Science 2001
Introduction

UnCommon Sense Library Volume II
TrustMark 2001 by Timothy Wilken

23

As Newtonis quoted as saying,

“If I have seen farther than others, it is because I have stood on the
shoulders of giants.”

Einstein was 230 years later than Newton. Einstein was standing on Newton’s
shoulders as he created a more accurate model of reality. Humans will always seek to
know more. Humans will always seek more accurate models of reality. Humans will
always seek the laws of Nature.

Today²⁰⁰¹, human science is more humble. It accepts the fact that today’s knowledge is
incomplete. It accepts the fact that human science will always know more later. This
is the nature of science—this is the nature of time-binding.

I claim no special privilege or intellectual superiority. I simply have the great fortune
to be later. I too am standing on the shouldersof giants, and occasionally the
vantagefrom that position has allowed me to see farther.

Science 2001
Introduction

UnCommon Sense Library Volume II
TrustMark 2001 by Timothy Wilken

24

Knowing²⁰⁰¹

Knowing is a distinctly human activity. This ability to know results both from our
unique human awarenessof timeand GOD’s great gift of a world that is knowable.

Nature is comprehensible. Nature is orderly. Nature follows the rules. Nature makes
sense. Humans use their time-binding power to discover the ‘laws’of Nature. And
these ‘laws’ of Nature do not stand in isolation. They fit together like pieces in a jigsaw
puzzle.⁶

Fuller’sPrinciple of Cosmic Integrity

Nature is honest. She plays by the rules. R. Buckminster Fullercalled this the
Principle of Cosmic Integrity⁷which he described as the first ‘law’ of Nature.
Writing in 1975, Fullerexplained:

“The more we know the more mysterious it becomes that we can and do know
both more and less. The unique characteristic of life is awareness—which
develops gradually into human comprehension only to become aware of how
inherently little we know. But that little we know or may come to know
additionally is ever subject to further exploration, discovery, and
comprehension.

“That there is an unknown is proven by the succession of revelations of
additional generalized principles all of which are discovered as implicit in
Nature. It is also retrospectively manifest that this amplifying knowledge,
discovered by intuition and mind was discovered from the previously
unknown.

“There is in Universe a vast order. It never forsakes. I throw a coin in the air,
and it returns and hits the floor everytime. Nature is never at a loss about

⁶Author’s Note: Just a reminder that I have adopted Korzybski’s convention of using single quotes to
denote multiordinal terms and alert the reader that the enclosed term may have different meanings.

⁷R. Buckminster Fuller, SYNERGETICS—Explorations in the Geometry of Thinking, Volumes I & II,
New York, Macmillan Publishing Co, 1975, 1979

Knowing 2001
Chapter 1

UnCommon Sense Library Volume II
TrustMark 2001 by Timothy Wilken

25

what to do about anything. Nature never vacillates in her decisions. The
rolling oceans cover three-quarters of Earth. Along the beaches, the surf is
continually pounding on the shore. No two successive local surf poundings
have ever been the same nor will they ever be the same. They typify the
infinitude of individualism of every special-case event in the Universe.

“Weightless, abstract human mind reviews and from time to time discovers
mathematically reliable and abstractly statable interrelationships existing
between and amongst any of the special-case events. When a long-term record
of testing proves the relationship to persist without exception, it is stated as a
scientifically generalized principle.

“The cosmic intellectual integritymanifest by Universe—the orderly
interaccommodation of all the generalized principles constitutes a design.
Design as a concept of ordered relationships is apprehendable and
comprehendable exclusively by intellect. As the human mind
progressively draws aside the curtain of unknownness the great design laws
of eternally regenerative Universe are disclosed to human intellect.

“Science has been cogently defined by others as the attempt to set in order the
facts of experience. When science discovers order subjectively, it is pure
science. When the order discovered by science is objectively employed, it is
called applied science. The facts of experience are always special cases. The
order sought for and sometimes found by science is always eternally
generalized; that is, it holds true in every special case. No generalized
principles have ever been discovered that contradict other generalized
principles. All the generalized principles are interaccommodative. The
scientific generalizations are always mathematically statable as equations
with one term on one side of the equation and a plurality of at least two terms
on the other side of the equation.

“NATURE(N) –def–> The totality of both all that is known—
Universe(U), and all that is unknown(O), or N = (U + O).

“Nature is the integral of all the integrities always manifest in the
progressively discovered generalized eternal principles. Nature then is all
that we think we do know, plus all that we don’t know, whether or

Knowing 2001
Chapter 1

UnCommon Sense Library Volume II
TrustMark 2001 by Timothy Wilken

26

not we know that we don’t know.Whatever nature permits is natural. If
nature does not permit it, it cannot and does not occur.

“Universe is all the known. Universe is the aggregate of all of humanity’s all
time, consciously apprehended and communicated experiences, including both
the explicable and the as-yet unexplained. Human awareness first
apprehends, then sometimes goes on to comprehend.”⁸

Fuller defines ‘Universe’ as the smaller term contained within ‘Nature’. ‘Universe’ is
what humanity knowsof ‘Nature’. ‘Universe’ is then the sumof all discovered ‘laws’
of Nature from the beginning of human thinking to the present. The sum of all
discovered scientific theories—the sum of all models of reality. ‘Universe’ is then as
complete a model of ‘Nature’ as total humanity²⁰⁰¹can create. We should then use
Korzybski’s convention of datingto identify which model of ‘Nature’ we are talking
about. Universe¹⁷⁶³is not Universe²⁰⁰¹.

And the human needto know and understand Nature, results in a mind always
seeking—always searching. The human mind must continue to explore, to discover, to
differentiate, and to comprehend. As Harry J. Rathbun¹⁹⁷⁶explains:

“The process of science is to discover and formulate the functioning
relationships in any specific area under investigation. The key word is
discover. Science deals with reality. And by reality we mean “the way things
are”. Instead of “functioning relationships” we more commonly speak of “cause
and effect”, but either way we are talking about the same thing.

“Science rests on the basic faith that we live in an orderlyUniverse. It holds
that there are dependable relationshipsin the structure of reality. It holds
further that these can be discovered by patient, honest, detached
investigation. Such investigation involves the formulation and testing of
hypotheses. Hypothesis is a proposed model of reality based on the scientist’s
observation of the relationships under study. The hypothesis is then tested to
find out whether it matches the real world. If it does, we say that a scientific
law—a law of nature—has been discovered. Science is the process of reducing
mystery to knowledge.

⁸R. Buckminster Fuller, SYNERGETICS, 1975-1979, ibid

Knowing 2001
Chapter 1

UnCommon Sense Library Volume II
TrustMark 2001 by Timothy Wilken

27

“Discovery of truth, of reality, of what needs to be done to serve the goal,
involves dialogue—asking questions, probing, investigating, testing. That is
the essence of the scientific method which has brought us so far in discovering
important relationships that exist in the physical world. But scientists find
that the more we learn, the more there is yet to be discovered.

“Further mystery seems always to lurk behind our discoveries. Inevitably, if we
push far enough, we come up against ultimate mysterybeyond our present
human power to understand.”⁹

Nature is comprehensible. Nature is orderly. Nature follows a set of rules. Nature
makes sense. When we humans use reason to discover these rules, we can improve our
lives by living by the rules—by living in harmony with the ‘laws’ of Nature. As long as
humanity survives human knowing will grow without end. Thus ‘Universe’ our model
of ‘Nature’ will grow evermore accurate—evermore complete—evermore near to the
‘Truth’.

“Seek and ye shall find. Ask and ye shall receive. Knock and it shall be opened
unto you.”
Jesus of Nazareth

“The most incomprehensible thing about the Universe is that it is
comprehensible.”
Albert Einstein

Another synergy scientistArthur Youngwrites on the search for truth in 1974:

“Both religion and science have a common origin in the search for truth, but
have approached this goal differently. Religion depends on revelation or
inspired teachers, science on experiments and theories. The investigations I
have made into these subjects indicate that these two quite different
endeavors tell the same story, reach the same conclusions. The agreement to
which I refer is to be found between the ancient myths and the most recent
finding of quantum physics.

⁹Harry J. Rathbun, Creative Initiative: Guide To Fulfillment, Creative Initiative Foundation, Palo Alto,
California, 1976

Knowing 2001
Chapter 1

UnCommon Sense Library Volume II
TrustMark 2001 by Timothy Wilken

28