From: Steven Eiger (eiger@montana.edu)
Date: Thu Jan 04 2001 - 14:03:02 PST
Message-Id: <l03102805b67aa330f2bd@[153.90.150.107]> Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2001 15:03:02 -0700 From: Steven Eiger <eiger@montana.edu> Subject: Re: pinhole re: Not Knowing
Ron, If I remembe,r this all started because the idea came up that there
were some things that we could never know. I might put the question of
"why are there just two types of electric charge" in that category. It
seems to be a fundamental "given", and I can not even think of any way of
beginning to probe into the question, much less think of a test to validate
any sort of idea. As you have eloquently pointed out, scientific
understanding has changed dramatically in the last several hundred years.
My point is that much of what is now accepted used to be in a similar
category some time ago. I agree that the people who forge ahead are
generally not looking backwards,perhaps I should have said that they also
did not put much credence in popular beliefs. There was a time when many
physicists thought physics was prtetty much finished, and they were wrong,
people beleived that the brain would never be understood, being a mystical
black box, yet we no longer believe that. When I read accounts of peo;e
who have made large leaps in knowledge it is certainly true that they do
not look for what people did not know, but they sure do not put much faith
in what has been accepted. Feynman is a great example, as is Einstein,
both always worked things out from basic principles. I suppose we are
discussing what are basic principles, particle physics has sure put a dent
in basic principles in the last 100 years, as has relativity.
This was my point, while today's basic principles are interesting, they may
not be so basic in a few hundred years. When I think of basic, these ideas
are also untestable. As I am trained as an experimentalist, and in my
experience, most science needs to be confirmed by experiment, this testable
bit looms large. I just think that we may be being arrogant saying today
that we know the limits of human knowledge, and not so paradoxically am for
encourging a little arrogance in our students, so they can prove us wrong
all over again. It sounds like you and I would agree on much, I think you
have misread the "intent" of what I earlier wrote. Steve
Steven Eiger, Ph.D.
Department of Cell Biology and Neuroscience and the WWAMI Medical Education
Program
PO Box 173148
Montana State University - Bozeman
Bozeman, MT 59717-3148
Voice: (406) 994-5672
E-mail: eiger@montana.edu
FAX: (406) 994-7077
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Oct 16 2001 - 12:22:07 PDT