«What are you, Khvostov, – going into his room,

I cried out, –“Why should you be here?

You’re a fool, not crazy,

THERE’s NOTHING you can get away with!

A.F.Voeikov (1778-1839), the poem “The Madhouse”

(A poem I’ve quoted more than once.)

The famous story of two Indian girls who grew up in a pack of wolves from infancy. They “absorbed” exactly those reflexes and rules of behavior that were characteristic of wolves.

If you put a newborn in a madhouse and there he will grow up and “gain intelligence”, then, after leaving it and entering ordinary human society, he will consider IT to be a kind of madhouse, a city, a country, a planet of psychos!

I think these two examples are enough for readers to understand the following:

We all grew up in the madhouse of our multi-million-year-old instincts and prejudices inherited from our animal ancestors. A lot of things are NATURAL AND OBVIOUS to us because of these innate attitudes, which have NEVER NOT BEEN CONFIRMED either logically or experimentally, that is, within the framework of a real scientific approach!

As far as I know, Francis Bacon was the first to point this out in his work «The New Organon”, speaking about the idols of the tribe, cave, market and theater.

Later, Immanuel Kant tried to hint at the same thing with his ideas of «Die Sache an sich”, “thing-in-itself”, that is, to push the idea that we do not know some objectively existing reality, but only our sensations, reflecting SOMETHING, the way certain properties of this reality affect our senses.

After several hundred years of complete silence on this topic by a stupefied herd of “science experts,” Albert Einstein pointed out the SAME thing.

(I have to quote Einstein and myself)

Here are two excerpts from his work:
5. On two arbitrary hypotheses implicitly contained in the familiar concepts of time and space.
(From the work of A. Einstein:  The principle of relativity and its consequences in modern physics. 1910, Page 138, 1st volume  Collections Of Scientific Papers)
Page 146)
“No matter how well-founded this rule (Galilean addition of velocities) may seem at first glance, nevertheless there are at least two arbitrary hypotheses hidden in it, which, as we will see, govern all kinematics.
These hypotheses led us to believe that with the help of the laws of transformations (Galileo) it is possible to show the incompatibility of the Lorentz theory with the principle of relativity (Galileo).
The first hypothesis concerns the physical concept of measuring time….
Page 147.
“… Until now, this addition has been made unconsciously.”
(We are talking about the concept of simultaneity for points spatially separated)
Page 151.
“So, the second unconscious hypothesis in kinematics can be expressed like this:
The kinematic configuration and the geometric configuration are identical”
(We are talking about the configuration of a body moving uniformly and rectilinearly and the configuration of a body at rest).

My comment:
What are these passages about? About physics (in the strict sense of the word) or about “philosophy” or, more precisely, about psychology?
If Einstein’s keywords in this work are: “Arbitrary”, “habitual”, “seemingly at first glance”, “implicitly”, “unconsciously” and “unconscious”???
If physicists had been looking for a solution to the problem of the incompatibility of mechanics and electrodynamics only in physics (as such great scientists as H.A. Lorentz and H. Poincare did), that is, on a certain “physical plane of thought”, then the Theory of Relativity would never have appeared, but there would have been dozens of artificial explanations ad hoc, which masqueraded our inability to resolve this incompatibility!
Einstein’s genius lies precisely in the fact that he again REACHED another level of thinking, into the “third dimension”, into another conceptual space, and there, in this “other space”  he found the reason for the inconsistency of the PHYSICAL in NON–PHYSICS – and in PSYCHOLOGY, in our million-year-old instincts, even from reptiles and even fish!

I am saying this because in order to solve basic, conceptual problems, it is often necessary, even USUALLY, to go beyond the subject of physical or technical consideration of the problem, and look for the source of our misconceptions not in physics, biology, chemistry or anything “specialized”, but in a completely different field – in the field of obvious, so familiar For us, animals and herd prejudices!

AND THEIR SUBSEQUENT REJECTION!

It doesn’t matter what to call this approach – philosophical, psychological, philological or physiological.

The main thing is to find a solution, and “the winner is not judged!”

The conclusion?

It’s simple:

When we solve any problem in any field of knowledge, even if we are not yet able to jump off the familiar mental plane into another conceptual dimension-space, we must strictly REMEMBER these “habitual, natural and obvious” dominants in our minds, which are just multimillion-year-old animal prejudices, and not strictly and HONESTLY scientifically proven facts and theories!

They, these zoological prejudices, can concern both our most fundamental ideas, such as “Space and Time,” and any psychological herd trivia, such as “Who did not love, he did not live anyway.”

Even with this in mind, we are already freeing our thinking a little from this heavy slavish yoke of innate dogmas and slightly increasing our chances of solving a problem by taking a small step away from the usual and ordinary plane of thought!

Into another, non-dogmatic dimension of our thinking!

2 III 2026