ABSTRACT
The creative observer is removed from the novel observation in the process of ‘scientific reporting’. The state of the observer is crucial to the kind of truth that might be discovered. Observer effects are therefore anomalous and should be eliminated. This is first-order science, or exo-science. The presence of the observer in the observation is a condition of the nature of second-order science. More fundamentally the centrepiece is not the observer alone but the triadic system of observer, society and language. If the observer is excluded then the ethical response to the challenge of undecidable questions generated by hyperturbulence are excluded. From a second-order perspective the observer is continuously bringing forth a world and responding and learning from that world. The distinction is that in third-phase science the multi-observer dialogue is an essential procedure of the discipline. Observation and intervention are not one-way streets. There is reciprocity between the observer and the world observed.
