No, the most basic is logic. As for why many people mistake it for “physics”, it is estimated that the main reason is that most people do not understand the basic principles of philosophy and are misled by the word ” physicalism “.
It is estimated that many people can’t explain this clearly, so I will first talk about “physicalism”.
Physicalism does not refer to physics, but refers to certain positions, attitudes, methodologies, and research ideas in physics and modern physics research, which are common attributes in scientific research. In other words, the rules of physicalism exist not only in physics, but also in natural science research such as chemistry and biology. In fact it is a philosophical question.
As for why it is named after physics, it is probably due to the “primary” status of physics compared to other natural sciences. When the microcosm of an object reaches a certain level, it belongs to physics). But this kind of phenomenon is only valid in the natural sciences, and it does not mean that the content of physicalism is equivalent to the content of physics.
According to tradition, the content of physicalism belongs to the category of philosophy, and philosophy has never been the object of study of physics. Therefore, physics cannot be used to replace physicalism, and the “physics” in physics cannot be regarded as a prefix of the word physicalism.
More importantly, the future of science will not stop at the natural field, but also involve other fields, such as human thinking, cognition, and psychology. And the philosophical approach involved in physicalism can indeed guide research in these fields. But this is not the same thing as physics. The specific research content of physics has no intersection with these fields, let alone the ability to guide and replace philosophical research.
Mistaking the philosophical connotation of physicalism for physics actually reflects the natural flaw of philosophy—language problem. Natural language is not perfect, and it is not uncommon for humans to devise “physicalism” that is misleading due to the difficulty of abstracting a suitable concept.
At the same time, the latest philosophical knowledge is not popular in China. Today’s Chinese only know the clichés of Xizhe, but they don’t know that the basics that must be mastered in the introduction to philosophy are language analysis , to distinguish and analyze the “noumenon” of comparative concepts, and not to be deceived by the chaotic “form” of language. Learning analytic philosophy is already a necessary prerequisite for discussing philosophy.
Mistaking physics for the basis of science is therefore just a stereotype.
Secondly, Let’s Get Down To Business And Talk About The Real Foundation Of All Science-Logic.
All human knowledge has a carrier layer, that is, a symbolic layer. Such as natural language, mathematics, patterns, musical forms and so on.
The symbol is responsible for establishing the mapping relationship between the description tool and the object we describe. Without symbols, it would be impossible for any creature to express information, let alone record and describe the physical world.
Formal systems therefore play a very special role, and logic determines the underlying rules of these symbolic forms.
On top of the symbolic form, that is to establish specific subject knowledge systems such as physics, chemistry, biology, politics, law, etc. based on information carriers such as Chinese and mathematics. At the same time, logic is also applicable to specific disciplines.
On top of specific disciplines, there are various interdisciplinary and subdivided disciplines, and logic is equally applicable.
There’s a cutting edge thing to explain here. We are currently in a historical stage where the construction of the axiom system has been completed in the form of mathematics , but not fully logicalized in the form of language. That is to say, at the symbol carrier level, logic, as a scientific tool system network, has not yet fully realized the interpretation of all formal tools.
Now only the status of mathematics has been established, but the logical analysis of language, the most important formal system of human beings, has not yet been completed. The process of studying natural language will take a long time just like reforming mathematical norms, creating a mathematical axiom system, and establishing the status of mathematics as a science.
After the deconstruction of natural language is completed in the future , the basic usage of language and mathematics will be opened up, and the usage of daily language will be incorporated into the mathematics system as an important support for the human knowledge system, and its status may be on an equal footing with mathematics.
At the same time, the definition of science will be formally fixed and completely replace philosophy as the only existing knowledge system for mankind, and it will also unify the guidance of natural science and most humanities .
Yes, I mean, the definition of science will change in the future. For science in the future, after the logic of natural language is normalized, the supporting role of everyday language to science and technology is as critical as mathematics (especially in humanities and social sciences that rely heavily on language models , and the logical nature of many modeling processes also says Subjects that are not clear, except economics and other subjects that have basically completed mathematics).
The underlying operating theories and basic methodologies in the fields of nature and humanities will eventually become unified, and philosophy will disappear from the academic circle.
Although natural language is not as clear as mathematics, it is not like mathematics that can establish an axiom system that fits the ontology and form rigorously. But this does not mean that human beings cannot bypass the interference of formal tools, and directly construct its semantic ontological relationship network through the underlying laws of logic, forming a quasi-axiom system similar to the general ontology level of mathematics .
The emergence of this opportunity stems from the emergence of analytical philosophy in the 20th century. It clarifies the logical rules of symbolic formal systems , specifies the logical nature of natural language, and unifies all formal systems (natural language, mathematics, patterns, music… ) underlying logic rules .
It will guide the logical deconstruction of natural language by humans in the next few hundred years , and lead the scientific team to use stronger logic methods to seize the guiding power in the field of humanities and social sciences.
After mathematics led science to conquer the natural field, the axiom system of everyday language in the future will fulfill the long-cherished wish of science to conquer the humanities field. We are now able to glimpse the outcome of science replacing philosophy and unifying the world.
View Also :