The Pitfalls of Parallelism

Abstract

Physics-mysticism parallelism refers to the two-fold argument, following Capra’s formulation, that (a) “a consistent view of the world is beginning to emerge from modern physics which is harmonious with Eastern wisdoms”, and (b) “Eastern mysticism provides a consistent and beautiful philosophical framework which can accommodate our most advanced theories of the physical world”.1 The basic data for parallelism are common language (for example, English) statements on the nature and implications of physics and mysticism that vary in technical content. The methodology of parallelism is the comparative analysis of such statements. Similar rhetoric, imagery, and metaphoric content in such statements constitute the evidence for parallelism. The basic assumption in this approach is that if the imagery and the rhetorical and metaphoric content of statements on physics and mysticism are similar, the conceptual content must be similar, and the experience of reality must also be similar among physicists and mystics. Earlier I cited Capra’s comparison of statements by Thirring and Chang Tsai. Perhaps the most ambitious application of this method occurs in Needham’s studies on Chinese and modern science, characterized by the continuing discovery of Whiteheadian philosophy,dialectical thought,and anticipatory scientific attitudes, concepts, and methods in Chinese texts.2 This requires searching for, selecting, and translating materials for comparative analysis.