Research Program / Claims / a-1-9
Science should abandon rationality as the only legitimate way of thinking, acknowledge multiple thinking styles, and seek a synthetic field that integrates information from all disciplines to form a unified understanding.
科学应放弃理性为唯一合法思考方式,承认多种思考风格,并寻找能将各学科信息整合的综合领域以形成统一理解。
Concept A-1 state · Domain Consciousness States and Attentional Dynamics · methodological suggestion · interface 3/3 · testability 3/3 · status untested · ★ fundable
This program treats the Seth Material as a source of hypotheses, not as doctrine to be validated. Lead dossiers are AI-compiled from the corpus with a book-and-session citation after every statement; literature reviews are AI web-search summaries whose references were all DOI-verified against Crossref; the agenda draft is an AI synthesis. None of it is Seth's original text, and none of it represents scientific consensus. English fields are machine-translated; the Chinese text is authoritative.
Seth sources (book §session)
Adjudicating experiment
Transform the proposal into the hypothesis that 'combined thinking and knowledge integration improve reproducible discovery': about 160 four-person research teams are randomized at team level to analytical thinking, intuition/imagery-heuristic, interdisciplinary structured integration, and combined conditions; given identical materials, time, and computational resources, they propose and test models in complex-system tasks containing hidden true values. Primary endpoints are held-out data prediction performance and independent replication success rate, with creativity scores as secondary; period 12–18 months; all proposals still undergo the same evidence standards.
Suggested paper title
Combining Analytical Reasoning, Intuitive Generation, and Cross-Disciplinary Integration in Scientific Discovery
What it would overturn
If combined methods increase reliable discovery rates, this would revise the hypothesis that 'a single analytical generation strategy is optimal for all scientific tasks,' but it would not overturn the requirement for logical consistency and public evidence.
Candidate labs / funders
Santa Fe Institute,研究复杂系统及自然、人工和集体智能:[研究方向](https://www.santafe.edu/research/themes/complex-intelligence-natural-artificial-and-collec); Daniel L. Schacter,哈佛大学,研究情景模拟与创造性认知:[实验室研究](https://sites.harvard.edu/schacter-memory/home/research/)
Specificity of Seth's formulation
This is a normative proposal; it does not specify which style suits which task or how to measure unified understanding; it offers less distinct predictive content than existing creativity and interdisciplinary methodology.
Note
The four categories do not include 'not applicable,' so 'untested' accommodates normative propositions not yet operationalized; this label does not imply that multiple cognitive processes have never been studied.
Evidence (1, DOI-verified via Crossref)
Cite: Future Mind Institute, Seth Material Research Agenda, claim a-1-9, https://www.seth.org.cn/en/research/claims/a-1-9