The Removal of God from Knowledge: How the Exclusion of Absolute Subjectivity Shaped Modern Science and Its Limits

Modern science is commonly understood to have advanced by methodologically

excludingtheology, metaphysics, andsubjectiveelementsinordertosecureobjectivity,

universality, and reproducibility. While this exclusion has yielded remarkable

empiricalandtechnologicalsuccesses, ithasalsogeneratedpersistentandfundamental

difficulties, including the observer problem in quantum theory, the failure to unify

quantummechanicsandrelativity,andtheinabilitytoaccountformeaning, subjectivity,

and relational coherence within scientific theory itself. The exclusion of subjectivity

appeared, in the short term, to safeguard scientific rigor, yet it resulted in leaving

the very ontological basis of observation itself theoretically unaddressed.

This paper argues that these difficulties do not arise from technical limitations or

incomplete theories, but from a deeper structural operation performed during the

formation of modern knowledge. Specifically, it contends that what was systematically

removed from theoretical frameworks was not God as an object of belief, but God as

an absolute subjectivity that had functioned as a foundational point of reference for

knowledge.

Following this removal, subjectivity was relegated to an unresolved residue within

philosophy and entirely excluded from science, while relational structures came to be

treated as secondary or eliminable. As a result, modern epistemic frameworks have

become almost entirely dependent on binary oppositions—such as subject/object,

law/phenomenon, and observer/system—while implicitly containing a structure that

cannot be theoretically closed without presupposing a hidden third term.

Through a historical and structural analysis spanning theology, philosophy, and

physics,thispaperdemonstratesthattheobserverproblemisnotaquantum-mechanical

anomaly, but a necessary consequence of this exclusionary structure. It further shows

that, although quantum theory implicitly reintroduced relational structures from its

inception, it lacked the conceptual language required to define them explicitly.

In response to this structural deficiency, the paper introduces the concept of O3,

not as a new ontological entity, but as a recovered structural position. O3 designates

a relational locus generated when multiple terms enter into relation, and serves as a

minimal conceptual device for making explicit the conditions tacitly presupposed by

modern knowledge—without reverting to theological claims or abandoning scientific

rigor.

In conclusion, this paper argues that humanity now stands at a clear point of

bifurcation: whether to continue operating within a framework that systematically

excludes the conditions of its own intelligibility, or to reconstruct a new structure of

knowledge that explicitly incorporates subjectivity and relation. The consequences

of this choice extend beyond any single discipline and will shape the future trajectory

of human knowledge itself.