Do We Really Need to Ban Scientific Investigations of Other Dimensions of Reality?

The purpose of this article is to offer arguments in favor of doing broad science, which means focusing on the investigation of everything, supported by the elaboration and application of methods that make it possible to objectify reality, which includes the attempt to replicate evidence likely to come from a transcendent reality. We argue that doing broad science depends on adopting the assumption that there are other dimensions of reality since this broadens the horizon of investigation; and to take care that such assumption does not come to be left out due to the influence of intrusive lines of thought of the most diverse. Here we discuss three lines of thought showing fragility in them, which we understand to be well established in current times, especially in the academic environment, and which directly or indirectly advocate the adoption of a materialist vision, namely: the disconnected psychophysical dualism, the myopic pragmatism, and the primacy of epistemology over ontology.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Scientia et Fides
Published
2024-10-25
DOI
https://doi.org/10.12775/setf.2024.021
Primary Topic
Innovation, Sustainability, Human-Machine Systems
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Do We Really Need to Ban Scientific Investigations of Other Dimensions of Reality?

Flávio Osmo, Maryana Madeira Borri
Scientia et Fides
Innovation, Sustainability, Human-Machine Systems
article

Do We Really Need to Ban Scientific Investigations of Other Dimensions of Reality?

Flávio Osmo, Maryana Madeira Borri
article en

Abstract

The purpose of this article is to offer arguments in favor of doing broad science, which means focusing on the investigation of everything, supported by the elaboration and application of methods that make it possible to objectify reality, which includes the attempt to replicate evidence likely to come from a transcendent reality. We argue that doing broad science depends on adopting the assumption that there are other dimensions of reality since this broadens the horizon of investigation; and to take care that such assumption does not come to be left out due to the influence of intrusive lines of thought of the most diverse. Here we discuss three lines of thought showing fragility in them, which we understand to be well established in current times, especially in the academic environment, and which directly or indirectly advocate the adoption of a materialist vision, namely: the disconnected psychophysical dualism, the myopic pragmatism, and the primacy of epistemology over ontology.

Scientia et FidesVol. 12(2)
Openalex Percentile: Top 70%
Innovation, Sustainability, Human-Machine Systems
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.