Sure, intelligence makes you particularly good at this in a way that can be parlayed into fame and wealth etc., but the fit with intelligence is almost the least interesting thing about it. Some fairly stupid people have wonderfully scientific sensibilities and ways of seeing.
-
-
It’s no accident that early scientists were often also astrologers and occultists. Not only is that acceptable within the scope of the verb I’m circling, it’s necessary. Superstition is inseparable from this kind of questing and not only not a threat to it, but possibly an aid.
Show this thread -
If you see a strong distinction between science and superstition that must be policed to keep the former “pure” and “uncorrupted” you’re paradoxically being superstitious about the essence of science. Overanxious policing of science/superstition boundary is bureaucratism.
Show this thread -
The Hindi/Sanskrit word saadhna is another useful one with no English equivalent. Learning/study as a mindful spiritual quest. It’s often applied to learning the fine arts. The alchemist’s pursuit was saadhna. Sciencing as a developmental journey similar to learning music.
Show this thread -
And this is why I need a mansion. To do science, one must have money, and a mansion of one’s own.
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
A lot of what you’re saying makes me think of Michel Serres’ The Incandescent.
- End of conversation
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.