Knowledge: The Primordial Language of Human Experience
Knowledge, or Original Knowing, is interpreted as the innate and natural process of absorbing reality. It manifests through observation, deduction, and the intuitive recognition of axioms perceived in the world:
Observation: the empirical and attentive perception of phenomena. Deduction: the logical and natural inference drawn from observations. Observed Axioms: the intuitive recognition of self-evident truths perceived in reality — the basis of thought.
This primary knowledge is our initial language for interacting with and understanding the world. It was absorbed and communicated organically, without the urgency of extreme codification. It follows that Knowledge — the simple “knowing” through intuition and direct experience — is the original language of humankind.
Science: A Syntax of Communication, Rigor, and Active Correction
Science emerges as an evolutionary response to two crucial needs in the transmission of knowledge: falsifiability and reproducibility, in addition to the need for protection against error.
The goal of Science is to develop mathematical models with few parameters that accurately describe all — or at least most — phenomena of a given class, and to harmonize, as much as possible, all models that describe phenomena of different classes, preserving the internal consistency of a general theory that unifies these models.
The transition from Knowledge (intuition) to Science (syntax) is marked by the development of:
Symbolic Notation: the creation of symbols, formulas, and numbers to encode knowledge precisely. Formal Methodology: the emergence of rules governing how knowledge must be scientifically written, tested, and communicated.
The Dual Role of Science
Science is the set of rules — the grammar — that formalizes Original Knowledge. It fulfills a dual role:
Tool of Rigor (Vehicle): it formalizes and guarantees the quality and universality of knowledge in scientific form. Falsifiability and reproducibility act as mechanisms for verifying scientific syntax, testing whether the created structure (model, formula, theory) truly represents reality. Corrective Mechanism (Engine): the syntactic structure itself imposes a discipline of thought that refines the scientific writing of knowledge. Error is detected when the formula does not converge with the phenomenon, and the system self-adjusts. Science, therefore, does not “discover” truth by itself — it writes knowledge and adjusts the writing until the representation is consistent with reality.
The Scientific Language as a Tool for Organization and Expansion
The strength of Science lies in its ability to organize thought and reveal the invisible. With intelligence, man can use this syntax to structure ideas, create conceptual relations, and “zoom in” on reality — perceiving the micro, the distant, and the abstract.
The heuristic and creative power of Science does not stem from the syntax itself, but from the intelligent use of that syntax as a tool for organization and testing. The rigorous structure forces the mind to expose gaps, inconsistencies, and new possibilities. Thus, intelligence makes discoveries by reorganizing symbols that, when validated by experience, become true knowledge.
In this way, Science does not transcend its nature as a representational language — it expands it through human reasoning, functioning as a conceptual magnifying lens capable of predicting and identifying phenomena not yet observed.
Scientific Neology and Conceptual Creation
Science does not possess the capacity to “discover,” for its nature is linguistic. The researcher creates conceptual neologisms when existing vocabulary is insufficient to express new perceptions of reality. Just as a living language creates new words, Science is compelled to create new symbols and theories when the observed world demands new forms of expression.
The invention of terms such as black hole, subatomic particle, or quantum field does not merely reveal new objects but new ways of seeing. These concepts are not born from nothing — they are the result of the intelligent reorganization of scientific syntax to coherently explain what was previously beyond the reach of Original Knowledge.
Poincaré and the Choice of Language
As Henri Poincaré stated:
“When the mathematician enunciates an axiom, he does not assert a truth of nature, but chooses a convenient language. Experience only intervenes to show that this language is the most adequate for our perception of space.”
Experience, therefore, is the arbiter that decides whether the created syntax correctly describes reality. Science is the language — experience is the judge.
The Dialectical Relationship: Syntax and Intuition
The distinction between Primordial Knowledge and Scientific Syntax is not one of separation, but of dialogue.
The methodological rigor of Science imposes clarity and discipline to establish a faithful representation of reality — it is also a workshop where human thought can be refined and elevated.
The Pedagogical Critique: The Error of Inversion
The greatest error of modern pedagogy is attempting to teach primordial knowledge through syntax before developing intuition.
Teaching formulas and methods without first awakening the capacity to observe, deduce, and imagine is to suffocate the source of knowledge. Science must come after insight — as the rigorous translation of what has already been intuitively understood.
Without this order, one forms an individual who repeats but does not understand; calculates but does not think — merely an echo.
The Social Nature of the Scientific Language
The validity of Science is determined not only by the internal coherence of its grammar but also by social consensus. Like any language, it is alive — it depends on the community of “speakers”: scientists.
Consensus defines which “words” (theories), “dialects” (disciplines), and “syntactic rules” (methods) are accepted. The rigor of Science is, therefore, also a social rigor — sustained by debate, critique, and collective validation.
However, the popular concept of what science is remains illogical. The vast majority believe that science is knowledge or understanding, but far from it — science is a language created by human beings with the intention of representing observable phenomena.
Conclusion: The Language of Truth
Science is a language of rigor and an indispensable tool for organizing, correcting, and validating human knowledge. Its formulas do not create reality — but they ensure that what has been written, and at times what has been thought, represents it with precision.
It is the vehicle that seeks to transport knowledge accurately, and through its logical organization, expands the horizon of the human mind. True knowledge is born from observation, intuition, and imagination — but it is Science, as a language, that makes it reproducible, modifiable, verifiable, and universal.
Yet, being a language that seeks to represent knowledge, it is logical to conclude that science will never be able to represent 100% of reality, for not all variables participating in an event can be sufficiently observed to enter this syntax. Nonetheless, it succeeds in closely imitating phenomena, and through this imitation, we can modify accessible variables to uncover new reactions of nature and make new discoveries through these modifications.
Through it, humanity not only speaks about the world — it speaks with the world, testing, correcting, and perfecting the grammar of reality.