The value of science (1955) [pdf] • Hacker News Board

Re: The value of science (1955) [pdf]

#11

Post by mhh__ » Thu, Jan 21, 2021, 12:31 PM UTC

tchalla wrote: post #10

mhh__ wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But not without flaws (it's hard to know how much truth there is with the women - definitely a womaniser, possibly abusive but that could be just be for the divorce - but Gell-Manns criticism of him is pretty funny)

> definitely a womaniser, Curious - should someone who as consensual casual affairs with women be labeled as a "flaw"?

I think pretending to be an undergraduate to get with (your?) Students is pushing it.

I have heard him called sexist, but then again I have also heard him be referred to as slightly sexist but at the time one of not many people who would talk shop to women.

Re: The value of science (1955) [pdf]

#12

Post by jagrsw » Thu, Jan 21, 2021, 12:56 PM UTC

azepoi wrote: post #7

jagrsw wrote: post #4

Interesting read, but was the article printed like that, or maybe someone scanned it with a 20th century scanner? :)

Feynman gave this as a public address to a 1955 meeting of the National Academy of Sciences. It was then published in Engineering and Science 19: 13–15. ISSN 0013-7812. You can find it retranscribed here http://www.faculty.umassd.edu/j.wang/feynman.pdf or there http://alexpetrov.com/memes/sci/value.html

Thx

Re: The value of science (1955) [pdf]

#13

Post by amelius » Thu, Jan 21, 2021, 1:09 PM UTC

blackrock wrote: post #6

Everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler. -AE

The last part is kinda obvious as simpler would be impossible, per the statement.

Re: The value of science (1955) [pdf]

#14

Post by euske » Thu, Jan 21, 2021, 1:14 PM UTC

> the greatest value must be the freedom to doubt

I used to emphatically applaud this statement, but in this era of fake news and disinformation, now I tend to think differently. Of course the freedom to doubt is still important, but not all doubts are created equally. You have to beware of someone feeding you a suspicious doubt.

Re: The value of science (1955) [pdf]

#15

Post by heresie-dabord » Thu, Jan 21, 2021, 1:31 PM UTC

euske wrote: post #14

> the greatest value must be the freedom to doubt I used to emphatically applaud this statement, but in this era of fake news and disinformation, now I tend to think differently. Of course the freedom to doubt is still important, but not all doubts are created equally. You have to beware of someone feeding you a suspicious doubt.

> this era of fake news and disinformation

To doubt means to test every proposition with intellectual integrity. And with a knowledge of established fact.

This is dependent on one inhabiting a social group where successful education has improved discourse and general thinking ability.

In the social context, it isn't as bad everywhere else as in the US. Propaganda has become lucrative, that's all.

Re: The value of science (1955) [pdf]

#16

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Jan 21, 2021, 1:31 PM UTC

mhh__ wrote: post #8

abhinav22 wrote: post #3

Feynman is a legend

But not without flaws (it's hard to know how much truth there is with the women - definitely a womaniser, possibly abusive but that could be just be for the divorce - but Gell-Manns criticism of him is pretty funny)

[deleted]

Re: The value of science (1955) [pdf]

#17

Post by JHer » Thu, Jan 21, 2021, 2:00 PM UTC

euske wrote: post #14

> the greatest value must be the freedom to doubt I used to emphatically applaud this statement, but in this era of fake news and disinformation, now I tend to think differently. Of course the freedom to doubt is still important, but not all doubts are created equally. You have to beware of someone feeding you a suspicious doubt.

Perhaps the ones falling prey to fake news and disinformation are not doubting enough or their doubting is one-sided. What they lack is the doubt in their own thinking and believing. I believe we should question our own convictions as often as possible and try to understand where they are coming from. That is, try to be aware of how our upbringing, our current personal situation, the experiences we've had in life (and the ones we didn't have) might influence our thinking.

Re: The value of science (1955) [pdf]

#18

Post by 1ncorrect » Thu, Jan 21, 2021, 2:18 PM UTC

euske wrote: post #14

> the greatest value must be the freedom to doubt I used to emphatically applaud this statement, but in this era of fake news and disinformation, now I tend to think differently. Of course the freedom to doubt is still important, but not all doubts are created equally. You have to beware of someone feeding you a suspicious doubt.

A concept I’ve been throwing around for a while is classifying truth.

An idea is a static description, immutable, zero variables. It can exist in one of the following three states:

- belief, zero supporting evidence - fact, only non-contradictatory supporting evidence - paradox, supporting and disproving evidence exists

All states are valid, but only an idea classified as a fact should be relied upon as evidence for another idea.

Every idea starts as a belief.

A fact can change to a belief if the evidence brought to bear on it is proven to not be classified as a fact. Equally it can become a paradox if new evidence contradicts existing evidence.

Resolution of a paradox would require at least two new, more precise ideas to be created, likely with a clause defining the demarcation of the paradox boundary. The paradox entity remains unchanged.

Reliance on a belief to support an argument I consider ‘agnostic ignorance’, and reliance on a paradox is ‘wilful ignorance’.

Re: The value of science (1955) [pdf]

#19

Post by protonfish » Thu, Jan 21, 2021, 2:43 PM UTC

pjm331 wrote: post #2

I forget where I first read this essay, but I have a tendency to go through periods in which I fixate on some person and exhaustively read everything I can find about them and Feynman was one of those people for me at one point (another was Hunter S Thompson - perhaps I have some attraction to brilliant and also deeply flawed people). There are many interesting points in this piece that are worthy of further discussi…

> ...brilliant and also deeply flawed people

We are all deeply flawed. In my experience, being unashamed of our flaws is a side-effect of honestly and humility. Being unable to spot another's flaws is most often the result of duplicity on their part. Sure, there are some pretty decent folks out there (Fred rogers comes to mind) but nearly all "perfect" people are just charlatans.

It's good to admire flawed people, because they are real.

Re: The value of science (1955) [pdf]

#20

Post by abecedarius » Thu, Jan 21, 2021, 3:42 PM UTC

euske wrote: post #14

> the greatest value must be the freedom to doubt I used to emphatically applaud this statement, but in this era of fake news and disinformation, now I tend to think differently. Of course the freedom to doubt is still important, but not all doubts are created equally. You have to beware of someone feeding you a suspicious doubt.

But he was not just saying "yay, doubt!", he was arguing that freedom to doubt was crucial to past progress, and that everyone's then-current state of knowledge was also riddled with error. Do you think this is any less true now? This part acknowledges what seems like your exact concern:

> Communications between nations must promote understanding: So went another dream. But the machines of communication can be channeled or choked. What is communicated can be truth or lie. Communication is a strong force also, but for either good or bad.

The change of this sort since 1955 that most comes to mind, for me, is that we have more information hazards analogous to "blueprints for a working A-bomb": now we have "genome of smallpox" and (maybe soonish) "algorithm for superhuman intelligence". But it's not like Feynman had no personal acquaintance with that category of hazards; and the current drive for censorship is way way broader. I think his case against it is just as good now, and more needed.