Boo

УВІЙТИ

Головна

Пара

Повідомлення

Профіль

База особистостей

Тести особистості

Ресурси

Ми виступаємо за любов.

Умовами

Приватність

FAQ

© 2024 Boo Enterprises, Inc.

#philosophy
#philosophy
#environmentalism
#showerthoughts
#volunteering
#lifeadvice
#debates
#dreams
#occultism
#psychic
#ethics
#ideas
#demonology
#ideology

Всесвіти

#philosophy#environmentalism#showerthoughts#volunteering#lifeadvice#debates#dreams#occultism#psychic#ethics#ideas#demonology#ideology
#philosophy
#psychology
#cognitivefunctions
#science
#physics
Jesse Cruz
Jesse Cruz

29д

INTJ

Близнюки

5
4

The Telephone Game

#psychology #cognitivefunctions #science #physics There's a popular saying “If you can't explain it to a 6-year-old, you don't understand it yourself.” A modern enough take. We go further back. “If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough.” Same value. Different value. Go further back. "One ought to lend themselves to so simple a description, that even a child could understand." Surely this must be the actual quote. But wait, there's more. "Most of the fundamental ideas of science are essentially simple, and may, as a rule, be expressed in a language comprehensible to everyone." And yet we are still not done... "Its great value lies in the logical simplicity with which it explains apparently conflicting facts in the operation of natural law It provides a more simple method. Hitherto science has been burdened by many general assumptions of a complicated nature." A beautiful saying. One that the author himself had to live by it. One that society has continued to refine. Perhaps too much. Perhaps not enough, or at least not in the right way. Einstein wrote this to his fellow colleagues. A simple enough philosophy that requires very little cognitive ability to understand, yet also requires massive cognitive function to enact. Psychologically speaking, may we have also been playing the telephone game, Pavloving ourselves to reinforce our own precepts and notions on what intelligence is? On what it means to strive for deeper insight and revelation on ever so shifting paradigms of truth? Has modern day specialization actually left us farther away from the bigger picture, forcing newer and newer generations to consciousnessly[sic] evolve and adapt to better suit society, leaving most to unnaturally fixate on one area, one spot of the jigsaw puzzle? Perhaps. Yet, I am assured, ever more so in the present day, that there are also those who have fixated on something quite special. Those whose sole focus is on recognition. Those who are never late, curiously enough. Those who have said goodbye to mundane worldly thoughts, and instead allow themselves to wonder the possibilities. Where we shall go from here. I don't know. As long as we get somewhere, that shall be good enough. Fini.

6

5

Коментар

Спільнота Philosophy

Спільнота philosophy, чат і обговорення.

ПРИЄДНУЙСЯ ЗАРАЗ

790 тис. ДУШ

найкраще
нове
P
P

29д

INTJ

Стрілець

5
4

Einstein is an interesting case, as he is basically at or near the beginning of "modern" physics, having his hand in both foundational theories (QM and GR). Do you have attributions for the quotes? I could not find any at first pass, but likely just missed it. Also, it is amusing that Einstein creates one of the more mathematically complicated theories (the tensor fields are a bit of a bear, as i understand it), then asserts everything should be "simple". It feels like context is missing. Which highlights the quandary... the idea as stated is a lie of the most pernicious type: one that people want to be true. The issue is that the fundamental ideas of science are, at times, simple... if you understand the math, which is the "language comprehensible to everyone". However, most people do not (and possibly cannot) learn and comprehend the levels of math necessary. That is, even if they can recite the equations, they lack understanding for the derivation and context of what the equations mean. Thus, science communicators are left using metaphor and allegory, often with only partial context, to oversimplify what they are talking about. Ultimately, this leaves the audience believing the metaphors, but lacking understanding of the truth behind the metaphors, which can make them susceptible to the rise of pseudoscience using terminology such as "quantum", "energy", "resonance", and "frequency", which are legitimate terms in science but are rarely used by these pseudoscientists in the same way. Perhaps a better way of stating it would be that a "theory or description thereof should be as simple as possible, and no simpler" as a means of highlighting the importance of not losing sight of accuracy and specificity, as well as harkening back to the importance of Occam's Razor.

1

4

Відповісти

Зустрічай нових людей

20 000 000+ ЗАВАНТАЖЕНЬ

ПРИЄДНУЙСЯ ЗАРАЗ