"Science isn’t the sum of what scientists think. Had science operated by majority consensus we would be still stuck in the Middle Ages and Einstein would have ended as he started, a patent clerk with fruitless side hobbies." — Nassim Nicholas Taleb
I think that he is right, though. In the scholastic middle ages, truth was political: a theory had not necessarily to be epistemologically correct, but conform to pious values and authority. So science languished. Chopra is beelining directly for pious audience approval.
-
-
Science languishes now (in some ways, in other ways the genie is out of the bottle) for the same reason. Funding agencies being unwilling to accept risk or failure, for example.
-
Science seems to flourish in waves (renaissance, enlightenment, positivism, modernism). At the moment, I see a lot of amazing progress in narrow domains, but it is drowned out in the general din. Perhaps because everything else is so loud now?
- 5 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.