Paradigmatic progress in the sciences has stalled since the 1970ies. There is disagreement about whether we have just figured out all the relevant paradigms, or whether we shifted from answering questions (which is cross disciplinary) to applying methods (cementing disciplines).
Most of these are members of the last, modernist generation. Nobody engages Penrose on Twistors very much, or Hofstadter on his infinist computation. Tononi has nobody to deconstruct IIT for him, etc. People either buy into or reject a paradigm, they work within, not across.
-
-
If that's the world you live in that's the world you live in.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I disagree and use the examples that you use for Penrose and Hofstader ( and the exclusion of Deustsh, Turoc, Guth) as the basis for my opinion.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Tononi has Koch, Chalmers, Crick and several others to deconstruct ITT.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.