On 22 May 2014, at 16:39, Telmo Menezes wrote:
On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 1:56 PM, Telmo Menezes
<[email protected]> wrote:
On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 1:18 AM, meekerdb <[email protected]>
wrote:
On 5/21/2014 3:44 PM, LizR wrote:
Yes, I was indeed thinking of the superhero Bicycle Repair Man when
I wrote that.
However I'm not so keen on deifying the Wright brothers when they
were just two in a long line of people in many countries who
gradually developed powered flight. They did make a significant
improvement, of course, but there were plenty of others who helped
pave the way to modern aeroplanes (including one somewhat dubious
claim from New Zealand)
Interestingly in the context of this thread, one of the Wright
brother's main contributions was their systematic (dare I say
"scientific") approach using a wind tunnel to study air foils.
It is perhaps good to make a distinction between "science: the
method" and "science: the game". Although honest scientists will
attempt to focus on the former and avoid the pitfalls of the latter,
honest scientists are human beings with human emotions and bills to
pay. So the end results is always some combination of the two. I
think this is unavoidable, but good to be aware of, especially in
times when the needle moves to much to the game side.
"Science: the method" is all about generating hypothesis and testing
them. Generating hypothesis is a creative process, and I don't think
that academia was ever a particularly good environment for
creativity. It's relationship to it is a bit bipolar: it eventually
glorifies the successful creative thinkers, but it fights creativity
every step of the way until then. Part of this behaviour is for good
reasons, but part is pathological, I would say. This is also true of
the relationship between academia and art, if you look at how the
major artistic movements of the XX century were received at first.
So it's not so surprising that academia is side-stepped to achieve
invention, which doesn't mean at all that "science: the method" is
thrown out of the window. In fact, academia tries very hard to
create a monopoly on "science" but this is perverse. Anyone can
apply the scientific method. It doesn't care about formal
qualifications, institutions, or even scientific journals or peer-
review. It will wield its results regardless -- and that is
beautiful in my view. A bit like the hacker's ethos in the 80s that
lead to a lot of the permission-free innovation in computer systems
that we enjoy today.
Coincidently, this just showed up on my facebook wall:
http://www.phdcomics.com/comics/archive.php?comicid=761
It's an exaggeration, but I think it illustrates the science as
method / science as game distinction.
Of course the "the scientific method" in that diagram if what Deutch
and myself criticize. It uses a fuzzy "establish" which is already on
the slope for making science into pseudo-religion.
The "actual method" is fun, but the idea that theory is not hypothesis
witness again a misunderstanding of what science can possibly (seen by
Plato in the Theaetetus and Parmenides).
Now with a comp, we have an arithmetical view of what the machine's
science can be and its difference with machine's knowledge,
observation and sensation.
We have a bit the choice to start by observing a natural phenomenon or
start by introspecting oneself, but we have to observe the out-
reality to refute the theory (up to dream and emulation, cela va sans
dire).
Bruno
Telmo.
Brent
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
send an email to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
send an email to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
