Introduction
This article analyzes the fundamental tension between scientific rationality and our evolutionary heritage. While science stems from a natural survival strategy, its modern form is becoming increasingly alien to human intuition. Understanding this paradox is crucial in the age of artificial intelligence, which could either deepen the social alienation of knowledge or become a new tool for critical thinking. Readers will learn how our social brain influences our perception of truth and why defending the scientific method is more important today than ever.
Dunbar’s Paradox: The Social Brain vs. Scientific Rigor
Robin Dunbar formulates the paradox of science: the very method that allowed us to master the genetic code is rooted in a primal survival instinct, yet remains hostilely alien to common sense. In animals, this instinct manifests as building causal models of their environment and a distrust of overly simple connections. In laboratories, this same cognitive structure takes the form of a rigorous procedure for proposing and refuting hypotheses.
However, evolution did not prioritize abstract logic, but rather the development of the social brain. Our intelligence was forged in the arena of tribal politics, where the Machiavellian hypothesis—the ability to coordinate actions and detect deception—was key. Consequently, the human brain is far better at handling problems embedded in a social context than pure formal reasoning. The foundation of this process is the theory of mind, which allows us to understand the mental states of others, serving as both a tool for science and sophisticated manipulation.
The Mathematization of Knowledge and Philosophy as a Shield Against Dogmatism
Through progressive mathematization, modern science creates a worldview that is radically counterintuitive. This leads to the social alienation of knowledge, which becomes accessible only to a narrow group of specialists. In response to this rift, the philosophy of science attempted to formalize the principles of rationality. Popper introduced the principle of falsification, Lakatos the concept of research programs, and Kuhn the structure of paradigms, all striving to restore science's status as a space for argumentative justification.
Dunbar decisively rejects postmodernism, calling it a "philosophy of despair." He argues that abandoning objective methods in the name of rhetorical emancipation is a trap leading to civilizational regression. Scientific methodology emerges here as a crucial defense mechanism against our own dogmatism. It is the infrastructure sustaining the lives of billions, protecting us from the errors that led to the collapse of entire cultures in the past.
Artificial Intelligence: Between New Mysticism and the Guardian of Truth
Artificial intelligence is changing the relationship between method and the social brain, becoming a new actor beyond the horizon of human comprehension. Different regions of the world are adopting distinct models for its development: the US focuses on market optimism, Europe on legal rigor, and the Arab world grapples with the tension between tradition and modernization. There is a risk that AI will become a form of technocratic fideism—blind faith in opaque algorithms—representing a disconnection of instrumental rationality from the discursive need to understand causes.
However, a prophetically rational scenario is possible. AI could be harnessed for metascience, acting as a guardian of the principle of falsification. By automating the analysis of scientific discourse, it could detect dogmatism and research weaknesses on a scale unattainable by humans. This, however, requires a paradigm shift: AI must stop being merely a market product and become part of the common good and public knowledge infrastructure.
Summary
In the pursuit of algorithmic efficiency, will we lose the ability to collectively seek the truth? The future of science depends on whether we can integrate the "black boxes" of technology into the structures of human justification. We must look deep into the algorithms before they ultimately shape our reality without our input. True progress requires a courageous dialogue between the cold logic of machines and the warmth of the human social brain, ensuring that technology enhances rather than replaces our rationality.
📄 Full analysis available in PDF