out of mind, out of sight

I came across a second example of the same phenomenom of how our perspective frameworks shape our reality (and I always try to pay particular attention when the same idea comes up simultaneously from different sources. I interpret synchronocity to mean the universe is trying to tell me something).

This second instance was in an article describing a recent conference bringing together thinkers like philosophers and theologians, to talk to scientists working on questions of the origins of the universe and see how the work of each group complemented or contradicted the other.

An argument developed where the two sides debated which discipline should have priority in setting the framework for exploration. The scientists, generally, said that science should take the lead and that the philosophers should create interpretations only after being presented with the facts. The philosophers argued that the idea is fallacious that science can explore reality from a nuetral, objective position. Science begins with a pre-existing framework that limits the questions they ask, what fields they think are worth exploring, how they set up their experiements, what the experiments are capable of revealing, and what the scientists see when they examine the results.

Because science operates within a framework they don't see, the position they call nuetral and objective, is actually skewed, and the science they are able to do from the skewed framework naturally reinforces the skewed perspective. The philosophers at the conference argued that the two disciplines must explore together and each be willing to change perspective frameworks based on the findings of both fields.