Academic discussion on interdisciplinary study of invisible forces

that anthropomorphism is associated with the activation of the same prefrontal areas that are active when people think about themselves or project themselves onto others. Conclusion Just as critically, the study of invisible forces requires a discussion of the method that successful teams use to work together as they cross disciplinary boundaries. Over the past few decades, there has been a demonstrable shift from the individual genius as the source of scientific and scholarly breakthroughs to interdisciplinary teams. This shift in the production of cutting-edge knowledge has been documented in all fields of scholarly activity, ranging from mathematics and theoretical physics to the humanities. This shift has both made possible and been necessitated by a need to understand complex behaviors. Although this project is primarily about the ways that scientists seek to study the impact of invisible forces, it will also reflect the methodologies that these researchers use so that their work is not constrained by common knowledge. The philosophy of science also looks different when dealing with simple causality (one-to-one relations) than with complex causality. Affirmation of the consequent, a logical error in which a given cause for an effect is inferred based on the observation of the effect, does not lead to a scientific error when there is but a single cause for the observed effect. However, as scientific inquiry addresses increasingly complex phenomena, and increasingly complexly determined phenomena, the philosophy of science needs to become more nuanced. A core challenge is to develop a “science” of identification and Page |15 aggregation of these invisible forces at different levels. Related research questions include why they exist, and measures of robustness. One of our central goals is to demonstrate not only that considerations of these forces matter, but that that they can matter a lot. There also are questions of value and ethics that could be implicated: descriptive knowledge, models, awareness of causal relationships, and so on, might not be enough to answer some kinds of questions, especially those related to value and purpose, which are the very energies that animate and invigorate real human systems. Economics comes close with its proxy measure of value based on the distribution of scarce resources and people’s varying need for these resources. But this theory comes up short in many instances where other values are at play that are beyond markets, such as in assessing the value of a human life, or whether all lives are of equal value. It is an especially poor model for helping us understand something as simple as the value of articles of sentimental value, such as family photographs, which may have little or no market value at all. Thus, how do we best understand the “sentiments” that are important in the real world? The members of the Network have worked beyond the boundaries of disciplinary borders, geographical precincts, and epistemological comfort zones to develop a rigorous but innovative approach to the study of the human mind, sociality, spirituality, health, and well being. The Network members represented in this book are Gary Berntson from Ohio State University, Don Browning from the HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_021261