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).
-
Show this thread
-
We certainly reward scientists not so much for delivering fundamental insights, but for exemplary application of methods, usually with minimal returns for the way we understand the universe. A paradigmatic contribution is mostly seen as an advance in methodology, not in insight.
1 reply 9 retweets 35 likesShow this thread -
Autonomous intellects (like Wolfram) exist, but they are insular, because they don't integrate well with scientific institutions, so the mainstream does not perceive them as relevant. We don't see schools of modernist thinkers (like the cyberneticians or first gen AI) any more.
3 replies 4 retweets 35 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @Plinz
Would you consider yourself to be among those autonomous intellects?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
I am way less sharp than the impressive feral intellects of Steven Wolfram, Ed Fredkin or Eliezer Yudkowsky, and my own contributions to the Weltgeist are inconsequential, but I am certainly autonomous.
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.