Under-Appreciated Gems of Scientific Epistemology
bruce.sinclair at NOSPAMagresearch.NOTco.NOTnz
Tue Jul 27 15:04:13 EST 2004
In article <2mn9p5Fohgn8U2 at uni-berlin.de>, Dirk Bruere at Neopax <dirk at neopax.com> was seen to type:
>Gregory L. Hansen wrote:
>> In article <235c483f.0407201549.681ffa4 at posting.google.com>,
>> Jeff Lanfield <jlanfield2003 at yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>I am writing a paper on how new ideas gain acceptance in science. I
>>>would like to get opinions on what were the most profound books and
>>>thinkers on scientific epistemology you have encountered.
>>>By this I mean a work that totally changed the way you look at the
>>>world and at science.
>> None. My understanding of science has evolved slowly, from numerous
>> sources and personal experiences. It's shuffled and stumbled forward as I
>> slowly grasp concepts on the fourth attempt at general relativity,
>> fifth attempt at quantum field theory, or whatever. There are certainly
>> some very good and useful books, but I can't say I've read any that, as
>> you say, have totally changed the way I look at the world and at science.
>Well, for me Neuromancer came close when it first came out.
>In general, SF.
Yes ... much SF. It encourages the use of imagination.
For me, probably the JG ballard ones and the phillip dick book with
"ice 9" in it (been a long time since I read that so this is IIRC :)
). Apply the precautionary prionciple ... always :)
In short, what people think they want is news, but what they really crave
Lord Vetinari, ¨The Truth¨ Terry Pratchet
Caution => followups may have been changed to relevant groups
(if there were any)
More information about the Neur-sci