Science of the Subjective
Robert G. Jahn and Brenda J. Dunne
Princeton Engineering Anomalies Research (PEAR)
Laboratory
School of Engineering and Applied Science, Princeton University
Abstract--Over the greater portion of its long
scholarly history, the particular form of human observation,
reasoning, and
technical deployment we properly term "science" has
relied at least as much on subjective experience and inspiration
as it has
on objective experiments and theories. Only over the past few
centuries has subjectivity been progressively excluded from the
practice of science, leaving an essentially secular analytical
paradigm. Quite recently, however, a compounding constellation of
newly inexplicable physical evidence, coupled with a growing
scholarly interest in the nature and capability of human
consciousness, are beginning to suggest that this sterilization
of science may have been excessive and could ultimately limit its
epistemological reach and cultural relevance. In particular, an
array of demonstrable consciousness-related anomalous
physical phenomena, a persistent pattern of biological and
medical anomalies, systematic studies of mind/brain relationships
and the mechanics of human creativity, and a burgeoning catalogue
of human factors effects within contemporary information
processing technologies, all display empirical correlations with
subjective aspects that greatly complicate, and in many cases
preclude, their comprehension on strictly objective grounds.
However, any disciplined re-admission of subjective elements
into rigorous scientific methodology will hinge on the precision
with which they can be defined, measured, and represented,
and on the resilience of established scientific techniques to
their inclusion. For example, any neo-subjective science, while
retaining the logical rigor, empirical/theoretical dialogue, and
cultural purpose of its rigidly objective predecessor, would have
the following requirements: acknowledgment of a proactive role
for human consciousness; more explicit and profound use of
interdisciplinary metaphors; more generous interpretations of
measurability, replicability, and resonance; a reduction of
ontological aspirations; and an overarching teleological
causality. Most importantly, the subjective and objective aspects
of
this holistic science would have to stand in mutually respectful
and constructive complementarity to one another if the
composite discipline were to fulfill itself and its role in
society.