Volume 1, Issue 7, July 2023 International Journal of Modern Science and Research Technology

Imagine Beyond Science

Philosophy Was, Science Is, And Then-What It
Will Be?
The preceding Philosophical question
A
Hypothesis
Is Science the final accomplishment of Human Beings?
Let us transform the definition Philosophy has been transformed into a Science, will Science
transform into then-what?
Let us evolve the definition Philosophy has evolved into a Science, will Science evolve into then
what?
Abbas Ali Shah. Pen Name (Mathematical Title):- Mr. 369

We as Homo sapiens have a spectrum of
thoughts, cognition, emotional intelligence
quotient (EIQ) and IQ, in a nutshell, a state
of mind, in our bygone time, when
philosophers used to think beyond that
spectrum or whatever knowledge gained was
spread in the populace, as a result, the
spectrum stretched out, by giving new ideas
and refined and evolved philosophy. From a
scientific perspective so far, we are stardust
as the origin started with the big bang and
life on earth, so many species are extinct
now due to unsuitable nurture according to
their nature, and species by natural disasters
like asteroids, and so on. Then 22, 0000
years approx. 0.22 million years ago till
now, we Homo sapiens are alive in this
period which is divided into various eras.
Watching through the spectacle of science
before our emergence, other hominoids were
extinct. The period is called the pre-
philosophical era before Homo sapiens, and
the post-period is called the philosophical
era because we are alive to explore to gain
knowledge about our surroundings.
The main drive, the core of philosophy, is
the existence to non-existence of the
Originator distributed in three stages. The 1st
stage was more amalgamated than 2 nd stage.
The finality, 3rd stage of the philosophical
era contains all the philosophy sections
separated. We can cognize it by reverse
psychology is a method of compelling one to
comprehend what one has a state of mind by
imagining not to have that by making up to
be in an opposite state of mind. If we apply
this to all or a group of populaces, there
would be diversity in it.
White bear-black bear paradox:
Well! Suppose we are from the area which is
commonly called the East. In that case, we
are familiar with the polar bear or white
bear, as well as with the black bear, which is
called “Bhalu” in Urdu/Hindi, but if we are
from an area which is in general called the
West or even from America, we won’t be
too much familiar with the black beer. Here
are two pictures of the bear, one with a
white shade and the other with its opposite
shade, the black one. Let us comprehend the
phenomenon of a Black bear and a White
Bear to nullify the position of one bear over
the other, let us read the text given below
and see both the pictures.

IJMSRT23JUL037 www.ijmsrt.in 230

 Volume 1, Issue 7, July 2023 International Journal of Modern Science and Research Technology
“There is no preeminence of a black (even a
bear) over white (even a bear) and there is
no preeminence of a white (even a bear)
over a black (even a bear)”
Let us do this experiment right now, try to
pose for ourselves this task in solitude, and
verbalize our stream of perception while
trying to think of a white bear. Now, let us
close our eyes for a while and then open
them.
What you have thought of?
“There is no superiority of a white (even a
bear) over a black (even a bear) and there
is no superiority of a black (even a bear)
over white (even a bear)”
Let us do this experiment gain, remain in
solitude, and verbalize our stream of
perception for five minutes while trying to
think of a black bear. Now, let us close our
eyes for a while and then open them.
What you have thought of?
No, let’s analyze the text above considering
the text given below in which the Ironic
Process Theory is being defined. The text
below will elucidate the misconception
about how we act in a particular state of
mind, the state of mind predicts, or the better
word would be to carve our behaviour
according to a specific situation. Ironic
Process Theory Defined while reading this
lesson, let us don't think about a pink
elephant every time we do. Instead, make a
tick mark on a nearby piece of paper or the
IJMSRT23JUL037 www.ijmsrt.in
book page, keep the writing beside the entire
time we are reading this and consistently
make marks whenever we think of a pink
elephant.
We will be asked how many tick marks we
made, so it's essential to be vigilant. In his
1863 essay 'Winter Notes on Summer
Impressions, Fyodor Dostoevsky wrote, 'Try
to pose for yourself this task: - not to think
of a polar bear, and you will see that the
repulsive thing will come to mind every
minute.' This sentence clearly defines what
later became ironic process theory, which
refers to a thought process in which attempts
to suppress specific thoughts only make it
more likely that you will think of them.
Daniel Wegner, PhD, came across
Dostoevsky's quote and decided to study this
phenomenon more formally. First, Wegner
attempted to pin down what is happening
when thoughts intrude, even though we try
not to think about them. His research
involved multiple steps, as explained below.
First, Wegner asked a group of participants
to sit and say aloud their stream of
consciousness for five minutes.
While doing so, he told them not to think of
a white bear. Then, every time they thought
of a white bear, they were supposed to ring a
bell. In this experiment phase, Wegner
found that participants thought of a white
bear more than once per minute, even
though being told explicitly not to. After the
first five minutes, Wegner told his
participants to speak their stream of
consciousness once again. However, this
time, he told them to try to think of a white
bear and ring a bell every time they did.
What do you think happened?
Did they think of a white bear fewer times or
more often? Before answering this question,
we must consider a crucial second group of
participants in Wegner's study. This group
was given the same task- speak aloud their
stream of consciousness- but were told to
think of a white bear from the beginning.
231
 Volume 1, Issue 7, July 2023 International Journal of Modern Science and Research Technology
Wegner's results showed that the first group,
who had initially been told not to think of
white bears, thought of them more in the
second part of the experiment than the
second group, which had never been
exposed to not thinking of the bear.
Consequently, what does this mean?
Wegner's experiment showed that the more
we attempt to suppress a thought, the more
likely it will come up later with much more
prevalence. After more research, Wegner
found that while one part of our brain works
to keep a thought locked away, another part
checks to ensure that the thought is locked
away, which causes us to think it (hence the
'ironic' part of the theory). In this
experiment, the bear is common, and the two
opposite shades (black and white) depict the
opposite thoughts, which can emerge as two
branches of philosophy as refined thoughts.
Even to think of a white bear, and not to
think of a white bear, or to think of a black
bear, and not to think of a black bear,
carrying out tests causes the participant to
think about it more.
We acquire from psychology that two
opposite thoughts can emerge from a
The result of two opposite states of mind on all sides is diversity
100% “C”- “C”
75% “C”- “B”
The conviction of the
existence of the originator, 50% “B”- “B”
there is a “God” = “Who”
25% “A”- “B”
0.0% “A”- “A”
IJMSRT23JUL037 www.ijmsrt.in
specific situation or demonstration.
Consequently, both thoughts are interwoven.
If, in this case, consequently, one thought
emerged along with its opposite view in
different participants simultaneously, which
was in a lab or room where experimentation
was being conducted.
Applying this to the main drive, the core of
philosophy, which is the diverse states of
minds, at the start of 3 rd, the final
philosophical era, from the section “C-C”,
the 100% conviction that there is an
originator, God, to its opposite thought, state
of mind, section “A-A”, the 100%
conviction that there is no originator, no
God.
As from section “C-C” Theism, a conviction
that there is an originator goes towards “A-
A,” it declines to 75% in the section “C-B”
theist-Agnosticism, 50% in section “B-B”
Agnosticism, 25% in section “B-A”
Agnostic-Atheism and it is 0.0% in section
“A-A” Atheism. From section “A-A” the
conviction that there is no originator
declines to 75% in the section “A-B”, 50%
in section “B-B”, 25% in section “B-C” and
0.0% in section “C-C” Theism.
0.0%
25%
The conviction of the non-
50% existence of the originator, there
is a No “God” = No “Who”
75%
100%
232
 Volume 1, Issue 7, July 2023 International Journal of Modern Science and Research Technology
We are forthright over here that both
opposite thoughts do exist, without one
thought the other thought nullifies itself (the
other idea). Without the other thought, the
one thought contradicts itself (the one idea).
As a result, the main drive of the
philosophy, sections “C-C” to “A-A”
encompassing all in-between sections, were
separated in the final philosophical era, and
before, in the 2nd era, it was an
amalgamation, no sections “C-C” to “A-A”,
but were in its infant form, a fusion. And as
we go at the start .22 million years ago it
was just a beast and prey behind the bush, a
survival, life and death, no survival. Thus,
Diagram:- 3D representation of philosophy’s core, main drive’s evolution (Gross evolution)
& time duration.
Time duration.
It starts from emergence of
Homosapiens, .22 Millions
years ago till now
Thus it’s the domain of philosophy, not
science because by seeing these thoughts we
learn that it all emerged through
IJMSRT23JUL037 www.ijmsrt.in
that’s how the originator manifestation to
nonexistence conundrum is elucidated, as it
is the product of gross evolution, it is in our
heads, genetically wired by the knowledge
of philosophy's main drive, not science. It is
not about the existence and nonexistence of
God, two opposite thoughts encompassing
all sections “A-A”, “A-B”, “B-B”, “B-C”,
“C-C” should be or ought to be part of the
philosophical era, not science. The reason
and logic behind it are that, the philosophy is
also about reason and logic and logic says
that we had that knowledge through
philosophy.
Evolution of philosophy’s
core, main drive
(Gross evolution)
philosophy's main drive in a philosophical
era. It was inculcated, or let’s say product of
philosophical intellectual and sensations, a
product of gross evolution.
233
 Volume 1, Issue 7, July 2023 International Journal of Modern Science and Research Technology
Analogically, a layperson under the
umbrella of section “A-A” heard there is no
Originator, he caught it from his
surroundings, predecessors (Nature &
Nurture), and that person (the predecessors)
make out it from his surroundings,
predecessors (Nature & Nurture), this goes
backwards in time. This goes in reverse in
time and becomes an amalgamation in 2 nd
Stage, and more amalgamation, a fusion in
1st Stage.
Analogically, a layperson under the
umbrella of section “C-C” make out there is
Originator, he caught it from his
surroundings predecessor (Nature &
Nurture). That person (the ancestors) comes
to be it from his surroundings, ancestors
(Nature & Nurture). This goes backwards in
time and becomes an amalgamation in 2 nd
Stage, and more mixture, a fusion in 1 st
Stage.
The thought, the absence of a creator
emerged in the opposite of the thought, the
idea there is a creator, there is a “Who”, and
it goes back to times in our collective
ancestors. Do we prerequisite the presence
& the absence of a creator, or is it logical to
grasp it like someone created all of it and no
one created all of it? In science, it is about
the phenomenon we are dealing with, but
not to approve or disapprove of someone
about whom we heard from our collective
ancestors who were dealing with
philosophy, the main drive or the core of
philosophy from the spectacle of science is
the presence and the absence of “Who”.
Even scientists now are interested in finding
“Who”s absence or presence of evidence by
science, which was a commodity that
belongs to philosophy. But, besides that,
there are so many philosophers till now.
Consequently, instead, it is the misusers of
philosophy who want to create the
philosophy of every invention and discovery
IJMSRT23JUL037 www.ijmsrt.in
of this scientific era, for instance, the
philosophy of Higgs field theory.
As an analogy, think of the world as a
school and the philosophers as teachers, and
also the driving force of the main drive of
philosophy, their state of mind determined
and influenced the community. Of course,
the work of a philosopher reflects their
conception, assumption, or belief, to Plato,
“God” was the transcendent-the highest and
most perfect being-and one who used eternal
forms or archetypes to fashion a universe
that is eternal and uncreated. Aristotle
conceived “Divinity,” as an unmoved
mover, the primary cause responsible for the
shapeliness of motion in the natural order,
and as divineness. Socrates did not explicitly
answer whether or not he believed in the
many deities of Athens. Still, he believed in
at least one divinity: his inner voice.
Although he did not speak in favour of the
deities, neither did he move to deny
spirituality or divinity.
Pythagoras founded his religious
brotherhood, which followed a life of strict
asceticism. He believed in the
transmigration of souls: the soul is
temporarily in Hades after death. It loses its
memory of its previous life and then
transmigrates into another human form and
is reborn. Anaximander, in his cosmogony,
held that everything originated from the
Apeiron, the “infinite,” “unlimited,” or
“indefinite,” rather than from a particular
element, such as water. He hypothesized
eternal motion, along with the Apeiron, as
the originating cause of the world. Thales of
Miletus was a naturalist philosopher who
explained the world by observing natural
phenomena attributed all to one element,
water. Despite that, he seems to have
believed in the concept of the soul too.
Aristotle cognised abiogenesis, and
according to that epoch, apparatuses and the
knowledge at that time, as a result, it
remained a fact until Louis Pasteur's 1859
234
 Volume 1, Issue 7, July 2023 International Journal of Modern Science and Research Technology
biogenesis experiment evolved the fact.
Many experiments had been performed and
considerable understanding has been
accumulated that we didn't always know, for
ages, we based our observations, relying on
our five senses, without currently available
apparatus, our interpretations of what we
saw going on in the world around us were
mostly based on observations. We can
conclude by this case in point besides
numerous hypotheses, that philosophy
evolved into a science, but not all of it, as
knowledge must be there to prove it, factual
or wide of the mark by evolved
methodology, the science. Subsequently,
over time, human beings invented by
discovery an innovative method called
science, a journey from philosophy's main
drive, the existence and non-existence of
“Who” to “What” is the phenomenon.
Scientifically some of the previous
presumptions are proved off-beam, and the
rest of the philosophy, the mother of science,
has almost been transformed into non-
philosophical facts acknowledged as
science. Have we come to the conclusion,
the final stage is science, or will it transform
into knowledge that will not be a science,
but rather something else, let’s call it “Then-
What?” For instance, in that era,
knowledge, the human will grasp different
perceptions than science. All that we
consider as tested facts, which are facts of
today (of this era), some of it will be proved
off-beam and the rest of it will be
transformed into Then-What? As a result,
Then-What would be, probably something
over and beyond “mathematics”, science?
Just like science is more evolved than
philosophy.
Which branch of science or combination of
branches will lead to Then-What? i.e.
Quantum physics, probing with the
minutest, Planck-length to Cosmology,
dealing with the biggest, Black holes
universe would transform science into Then-
IJMSRT23JUL037 www.ijmsrt.in
What or would human augmentation
chipping science data into the brain, with
amplified cognizance into super-
intelligence? on the contrary, Artificial
Super Intelligence to singularity will surpass
or take over science and transform it into
Then-What? As in its infant stage, it turned
over hundreds of years of human capability
in one game titled “Go” & proved more than
a thousand theorems, solving and generating
Mathematics Problems by Program
Synthesis. And now AI at its Infant stage, a
large language model (LLM) chatbot, is
trained on a massive dataset of text and
code, and it can generate text, translate
languages, writes different kinds of creative
content, and answers questions in an
informative way, even if they are open-
ended, thought-provoking, or outlandish.
In the case of humans, our Nature is flesh
and blood with brainpower, as a result, we
invented science, mathematics, and
Artificial Intelligence. Now in the case of
AI, its Nature is coding, and mathematics, as
a result, can it invent and evolve knowledge
from mathematics to non-mathematical,
science, advanced understanding, Then-
What? Think AI as another species, now in
its infant stage, it has the capability to
evolve to Super Intelligence and singularity,
surpassing human cognition, and
understanding. At that point of
understanding can Artificial intelligence
grasp, imagine and state Then-What? As
Einstein endorsed imagining, Feynman
described it's very hard to imagine envision
and visualize all the thoughts that seem
irrational for now. Though it is mind-
boggling, as we find mathematics is the
spine of almost all advancements but even
then, it deserves the answer. Whether it rests
somewhere in the probability scale of Yes or
No?
1. If NO! Then it’s just an unpopulated
imagination, a conception of the human
235
 Volume 1, Issue 7, July 2023 International Journal of Modern Science and Research Technology
mind and science is the ultimate
understanding.
2. If YES! Then being a theorist and
cognise of science, which is everywhere,
it is a question to get a broader
perspective about the probability of
manifestation of Then-What?
Mathematics was not what it is now, how it
began, we have the antiquity, the evolution
scale, when early Homo sapiens to now, the
journey of counting the animals, ten fingers
and with time like other sections of
knowledge, the calculation also grew, but
now as it is becoming the universal
language. The question arises here when
Artificial Intelligence will grasp the
unfamiliar what now we don’t know, as we
didn’t know in the past what we know now,
the scientific perception of us the diverse
phenomena. The answer is we humans
evolved and went through a process in a
philosophical era, we had different
perceptions and no knowledge of the
Darwinian scale, what in science we know,
in philosophy we didn’t, and now in science,
it's evolved, but the point is philosophy
transformed into science and science has the
capacity to evolve into something beyond
our perception about the surrounding, and all
of it is being grasped by humans, by
interacting with the surroundings. It is again
our cognizance about us as about the
mentioned extinct species based on present
understanding, which evolved from earlier
bits of knowledge, any understanding we
discover is by inventing the procedures and
apparatuses, the outcome of the interaction
of humans with our surroundings.
It is also about what to take and what not to
yield from our past, by analyzing and
probing what we have now, AI, genetic
engineering, and numerous precise scientific
procedures, and how to transform Nature
and Nurture, and how to lead all of us, we
the humans towards a certain point by not
only predicting, rather carving the future, for
IJMSRT23JUL037 www.ijmsrt.in
instance, not taking the certain behaviour
which have in our genes or which are
inculcated by the nurture in the past, and
even now. Consequently, we have to
analyze that and try to evolve our behaviour,
as we are the hoarier ones, to endow the new
generation to evolve. Accordingly, that's
how we can take or not take from nature and
nurture, what we have got in ourselves, and
now we have the capacity of the technology,
the science, through which we can grasp and
keep or confiscate certain mechanisms from
our genes, and protein sequence.
And all of it can be done with the evolution
of the mind, which is considerably different
from gross evolution, evolution is meant
towards the end which is survival, in
divergence, in the evolution of mind,
survival is meant towards the end, mind’s
evolution. This calls for to even the uneven
distribution of Mother Nature, by
eradicating the survival fear, providing all
humans' necessities around the globe,
nutriment, wear, accommodation, and
education, the prerequisite for “Artisapiens,”
the imminent of Homo sapiens using human
augmentation, with the dual brain, (1 st
stage), Brain series-parallel system (2 nd
stage) and neural network (3 rd stage) of
Artisapiens with virtual bodies linked with
each brain with bionic prosthetic and brain
into Nano to Femto chip (10 -15) technology,
without gender characteristics, male, female,
or androgynous.
When even brains +1, are in the slumbering
mode, the odd brains -1 are in the wake-up
mode, and the process is inverted
respectively, sharing all the data while both
modes, with a protocol.
This system can be operated for
efficiency, creativity, different fields, sub-
branches of science, and other drives, for
furthermost of the science work, doing
science tasks.
236
 Volume 1, Issue 7, July 2023 International Journal of Modern Science and Research Technology

In human augmentation, only the scientific species, Homo sapiens. Scientists have to
data is useful to chip into the brain, as we take responsibility, should be side by side
know work is being done on it. with the establishment and the politicians as
Analogically let’s apply the psycho-sexual scientists know about any emerging issue,
stages, nurture, to artificial intelligence from for instance, environmental, and global
its early stages, which will put an impact on warming concerns, are better than politicians
its perception in its later stages i.e., Artificial and bureaucracy.
Super Intelligence, Singularity, observing On the other hand, according to the
human behaviour Survival Of The Fittest, philosopher Socrates, we needed the
what we do to one another at domestic to populace to be philosophers and that’s how
global levels and other species, caging and democracy could be proficient but as
extinction. Eventually, all of the data evolving procedures for bringing up-to-date
becomes part of the internet and by keeping time, analogically Sciensocrasy, the
away from that, selfish genes term and AI minimum hierarchical channel from a
would be benign and altruistic by giving it nation-state system to evolved globalism.
scientific data and benevolent nurture, the Which is not only about leading, but also
Darwinian scale with the adaptability and evolving the minds towards
non-threatening state of consciousness.
From a male-controlled system to Feminism,
analogically a journey from body to brain is
categorically about equal rights and
responsibilities. As now Division of Labour
is evolved from a patriarchal philosophical
era, accordingly, we can transform to equal
rights through mind evolution, not by body
puffing, and renovation, which was the only
method, of sexual selection for females for
survival. But till now we have Cave-men
and Women behaviour as the female gender
has an equal population approx, but are less
supported towards science. As a result,
emancipation needs minds evolution, which
prerequisites a system, in which it can be
inculcated is the system of Sciensocrasy,
instead of having outmoded philosophical
political poles apart systems, Democracy,
Communism, Oligarchy, Aristocracy,
Monarchy, Colonialism, constraining the
populace to mental slavery which is far
worse than physical slavery, a less evolved
state of mind.
Each country head, establishment and
politician behave like an Alpha male, a
territorial male behaviour which is found
even in primates and other less evolved
species. But we are the most evolved

IJMSRT23JUL037 www.ijmsrt.in 237