Kant's discovery led to an information explosion in the modern world.

According to Ashura News, quoted by Mehr News Agency, Seyyed Mohammad Reza Taghavi, a professor at Shiraz University, looks at the subject of philosophy of science in a note and writes about it:

Does modern science discover reality or, in addition to that, does it also shape reality? It seems that the definition of science as the discovery of reality should be used with caution. Kant's revolution disrupted this definition in some parts. Kant's idea was new and exceptional and made history. In addition to discovering reality, he also proposed a new capacity for science. So, modern science does not only explore reality, but also changes and defines reality in such a way that it meets human needs. It seems that there is agreement among thinkers in the field of philosophy of science that the goal of science is to "discover reality." (Read: The work of science is to identify and discover "beings" and the human mind is the tool for discovering it), but Kant proposed the idea that the work of science goes beyond discovering reality and can "create or create" a new reality.) Kant's plan gives man the right to conquer and employ the world and everything in it according to his will. Gradually, this view came to dominate the world, including the scientific communities of the world (the view had no significant competitors). We consider that a free man can look at the world from any perspective.

When Kant's view was put forward and before that Descartes' view (I think, therefore I am), this story (read the historical twist of science) began, but make no mistake, I am not seeking to devalue Kant's valuable efforts.

Kant's high-level rationality put this important theory against the world's view that, O man: You do not have to only deal with identifying the world and only think about discovering it, but you can not be satisfied with the existing possibilities and identifying them and create whatever you like yourself.

Kant's discovery caused an explosion of information to occur in the modern world and a new tool is discovered every day. Successive discoveries gradually increased the attractions of the universe and pulled everyone towards it. Now, on the one hand, we witness the creation of something new every day and on the other hand, we witness its daily prohibition.

Now the challenge is whether the visionaries at that time were alert enough to notice that the distribution of human attention was slowly changing in a certain direction, if so, they should have done something. They should have decided whether this new change would meet their goals, which they naturally had to go along with. Otherwise, they should have invented an alternative (commensurate with their own perspective) and at least at the same level of efficiency and solving the problems of the individual and society that is competitive with the rival perspective.

We know very well that it is nothing more than a mirage to be able to lock the flow of human understanding and perception and control it. Those who considered man the highest of creatures and the task of science to conquer the universe are not and never were guilty of thinking this way and actively entering the scene to satisfy their desires. It remains to be seen what those who did not see man in this way (read: saw man as the highest of creatures and his creation in line with a specific goal) did to advance their view and whether they were even sufficiently conscious to see man at a historical turning point (read: historical turning point) where his thought process was changing and there were effects of this change (which would reach its peak in the next 200 years). The difference between the two views of man as the highest of creatures and man as the highest of creatures and the effects resulting from it are discussed in separate scientific systems.

Turning point in the history of science: The logic of discovery or the logic of creation

Earlier, the development that Kant made on the path of science towards the explosion of information was discussed. He greatly expanded the space of thought, but the definition of man as the highest of beings overcame the definition of man as the highest of creatures. This is where the historical twist lies. Where the definition of science goes beyond the logic of discovery (the traditional definition of science) and reaches the logic of creating the modern definition of science. We will explain the difference between these two logics with a simple example: In the logic of discovery, man goes to Mars to search for what is going on? And he reports that it is not suitable for human life here, because there are no conditions for life, including water (in fact, he is talking about beings or discovering beings).

In the "logic of creation," man goes to Mars and decides to make it a place to live. So his question becomes, how can I bring "water" to Mars and prepare the conditions for human life? In this space, the researcher's intention is not only to describe reality, but he wants to change reality in a way that he likes. So he does not intend to submit to the existing reality, but his intention here is to create and construct a reality that does not exist, but the subject uses all his rationality to create it (this is where the problem of subjectivism arises, which is not the subject of our discussion for now). Therefore, we must strengthen education especially in the section of the logic of creation. The logic of creation requires: creativity, giving opportunities, developing possibilities, mental fluidity, and avoiding quantitativeism. Perhaps the cooperation of education experts and engineers is inevitable in designing this section. I hope that we will pay attention to the issue and take the necessary measures in time.