“When people thought the earth was flat, they were wrong. When people thought the earth was spherical, they were wrong. But if you think that thinking the earth is spherical is just as wrong as thinking the earth is flat, then your view is wronger than both of them put together.”
I don’t disagree with the point in the post, but I do have a problem with this quote.
They were not just as wrong in an absolute sense, but they were just as wrong in the sense of how much it mattered at the time. Asimov said this as a reply to a reply to him saying that science has most everything figured out. For all that it matters to us, the Earth may as well be spherical, but it certainly isn’t flat. For all it mattered to them the Earth was flat. Someday, things like the Earth not being spherical will matter as much as the fact that it isn’t flat currently matters to us.
When technology advances to the point that physics matters, physics can advance. When that happens, it will advance. As such, our knowledge and the importance of its accuracy always match.
I can’t possibly disagree more. The importance of a round earth for oceangoing navigation and trade was ALWAYS of huge importance, and EVEN if I allow you to dismiss it, there are plenty of other examples where our knowledge is or was woefully inadequate even for what we want to do. You might say to a peasant it doesn’t matter what shape the earth is, but you could never say he didn’t need to know about the disease vectors of effluent in the water EVEN if he didn’t know. We are as we speak trying to understand cancer in greater and greater detail because want to cure it, but it’s not hugely more important today to cure disease than it was in the past.
The importance of a round earth for oceangoing navigation and trade was ALWAYS of huge importance
I find it unlikely that they didn’t notice if it was hugely important.
but you could never say he didn’t need to know about the disease vectors of effluent in the water
Useful, but difficult to find out, not unlike economics, psychology, and several other things we still don’t fully understand. I suppose we are making progress in these areas. We’re learning more, and it’s not becoming more important. We are still nowhere near done. I didn’t think of this, and I adjust my position towards yours, but I still disagree with the original quote.
but it’s not hugely more important today to cure disease than it was in the past.
They knew what they could do with their level of technology. Absolutely nothing. This is no different than everything about nanotechnology that we don’t know and won’t learn until we can actually make nanobots.
I don’t disagree with the point in the post, but I do have a problem with this quote.
They were not just as wrong in an absolute sense, but they were just as wrong in the sense of how much it mattered at the time. Asimov said this as a reply to a reply to him saying that science has most everything figured out. For all that it matters to us, the Earth may as well be spherical, but it certainly isn’t flat. For all it mattered to them the Earth was flat. Someday, things like the Earth not being spherical will matter as much as the fact that it isn’t flat currently matters to us.
When technology advances to the point that physics matters, physics can advance. When that happens, it will advance. As such, our knowledge and the importance of its accuracy always match.
I can’t possibly disagree more. The importance of a round earth for oceangoing navigation and trade was ALWAYS of huge importance, and EVEN if I allow you to dismiss it, there are plenty of other examples where our knowledge is or was woefully inadequate even for what we want to do. You might say to a peasant it doesn’t matter what shape the earth is, but you could never say he didn’t need to know about the disease vectors of effluent in the water EVEN if he didn’t know. We are as we speak trying to understand cancer in greater and greater detail because want to cure it, but it’s not hugely more important today to cure disease than it was in the past.
I find it unlikely that they didn’t notice if it was hugely important.
Useful, but difficult to find out, not unlike economics, psychology, and several other things we still don’t fully understand. I suppose we are making progress in these areas. We’re learning more, and it’s not becoming more important. We are still nowhere near done. I didn’t think of this, and I adjust my position towards yours, but I still disagree with the original quote.
They knew what they could do with their level of technology. Absolutely nothing. This is no different than everything about nanotechnology that we don’t know and won’t learn until we can actually make nanobots.
Well, cancer used to be quite rare when few people lived past forty.