51–60 of 69 posts
I am surprised to find out that Einstein was so convinced in the non-existence of free will. > I claim credit for nothing. Everything is determined, the beginning as well as the end, by forces over which we have no control. It is determined for the insect, as well as for the star. Human beings, vegetables or cosmic dust, we all dance to a mysterious tune, intoned in the distance by an invisible player. Meanwhile, I b…
I am surprised to find out that Einstein was so convinced in the non-existence of free will. > I claim credit for nothing. Everything is determined, the beginning as well as the end, by forces over which we have no control. It is determined for the insect, as well as for the star. Human beings, vegetables or cosmic dust, we all dance to a mysterious tune, intoned in the distance by an invisible player. Meanwhile, I b…
I am surprised to find out that Einstein was so convinced in the non-existence of free will. > I claim credit for nothing. Everything is determined, the beginning as well as the end, by forces over which we have no control. It is determined for the insect, as well as for the star. Human beings, vegetables or cosmic dust, we all dance to a mysterious tune, intoned in the distance by an invisible player. Meanwhile, I b…
> determinist and believe in free will. Do you care to elaborate more? I am genuinely curious about your opinions. Have you read/listened to any of Dr. Robert Sapolsky's material on free will? I am curious what you think of his position on the matter.
As far as Sapolsky goes, it's fine to argue that free will is an illusion. But it doesn't follow that we should stop believing in it. Actually, belief in free will is adaptive. Concepts that follow from free will such as punishment, guilt, blame, etc are extremely effective at promoting pro-social behavior and it's not clear how they could be replaced.
It changed everything.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You mean that it is just as bad if not more, right? Because it is making Einstein out to be some sort of rebel like who wants things to be "relative" as if it is a religion or philosophy of some sort. Relativity is just what he discovered, not some ideology he set out to prove or invented. Then the author goes on to try and apply this relativity to all aspects of the world, try to make puns on it despite Einstein spe…
exactly, plus the author's warped understanding, like einstein reinventing the wheel for every equation to make it "more" perfect, whatever that means; or in multiple instances, drawing up conclusions and asking them, or presenting these as facts in the article. or one article being split on 5 pages so I can see some ads in-between (not really the author's fault there though).
The discussion's article writes more like The Atlantic or NYMag interview style than AP News or Reuters. Both styles are suitable in my opinion.
The thing about Einstein is he did not discover that gravity bent space and then produced a theory to explain it. He predicted it. The proof came decades later, and his prediction was dead on target. It changed everything.
The thing about Einstein is he did not discover that gravity bent space and then produced a theory to explain it. He predicted it. The proof came decades later, and his prediction was dead on target. It changed everything.
whenever people say that modern journalists are bad and nobody knows how to write anymore, i'll show them this article
"When he ascends to his attic, she does not cling to his coat tails. When he wishes to be alone, she completely eliminates herself from his life. She spares him disharmonious contacts and protects the serenity of his mind with the devotion of a vestal virgin guarding the sacred fire.
It is by no means impossible that with a less-sacrificing mate, Einstein would not have made the discoveries which link his name with the immortals. Thus love, that moves the sun and all the stars, sustains in its lonely path the genius of Albert Einstein."