What is Digg?33 Comments
- uhohXaxioms, on 10/12/2007, -0/+19"We have to accept responsibility for the survival of the human race, instead of praying about it. The prize, if we can embrace this humanist philosophy, is an infinite and unimaginably exciting journey ahead of us."
Amen. Wait. unAmen.
It's time we stop waiting, and start doing. - Rikushix, on 10/12/2007, -0/+18the best, i think:
"Susan Blackmore Science writer and broadcaster, and visiting lecturer at the University of the West of England in Bristol:
Frighteningly, most people do not understand Darwin's great insight. What people miss is the sheer inevitability of the creative process. Once you see it —copy, vary, select; copy, vary, select —you see that design by natural selection simply has to happen. This is not like Isaac Newton's laws, or quantum physics, or any of the other great theories in science, where one can ask "why is this so?" It simply has to be the case. Then, the scary implications follow. If everyone understood evolution, then the tyranny of religious memes would be weakened, and we little humans might find a better way to live in this pointless universe." - antron, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9Oh my science!
Ha ha ha... You believe in a supernatural being. - dominasian, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9my favorite answer "Science is about uncertainty. We do not yet know the answers to most of the important questions — nature is smarter than we are. But if we are patient, and not in too much of a hurry, then science gives us a good way to find the answers."
- zeldafan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8I love how he says the universe is pointless, because once you realize that, it's like a whole new world opens up, and yet, nothing changes at all.
If I may throw in my favorite quote of all time (I think it has some relevance):
"True knowledge exists in knowing that you know nothing."
and even more in context,
"True wisdom comes to each of us when we realize how little we understand about life, ourselves, and the world around us."
- Socrates - AeonTorpor, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6The intellectual speaks because they have something to say.
The idiot speaks because they have to say something. - carpespasm, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5at least he didn't call you a retarded fish-frog-monkey
- autodrv, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4It has nothing to do with faith, it has to do with the observation of evidence.
- Daunting, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I'm surprised at all the discontented voices towards religion. Actually I am not at all, but it is surprising as to how fervent they are about it. When asked about lessons of science they insist on rejection of mysticism. Goes to show you how important reality is to these people. Overall, this is insightful.
- AniceAtheist, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Great comments from some great minds.
If only people would say things like these from the pulpit of mass media and mass religion we might be able to step forward once again as a species.
"George W. Bush thinks god told him to go to Iraq. to bad god didn't tell him there were no wmd's" - SamyIsMyHero, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5Life Lessons? I really don't think so. Not even a good read in my opinion. All the comments were repetitive, couldn't he have used only the best comments.
- barius, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Philosophy cannot give any answers that science cannot give. The only thing that philosophy can do is to help us to think creatively, but if science cannot prove a theorem put forth by philosophy, then neither can philosophy itself.
- gmiley, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2While there are quite a few good quotes in that "article", I think the one I liked the most was by Marcus du Sautoy: "They are like the atoms of arithmetic, the hydrogen and oxygen of the world of numbers." in reference to Prime Numbers. Just about anyone who has ever had any basic schooling knows what Prime Numbers are, but I had never really thought about it in the these terms. Not a very revolutionary statement, but I just found it rather interesting to think about it this way.
- SixSence, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2All we need now is some LSD or perhaps high doses of cannabis.
- sdcarter, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4If you can't say something worthwhile, don't say anything at all.
- AniceAtheist, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2so you took first year philosophy and now you espouse it whenever you get a chance. Which philosophy are you referring too? just in general? seriously your not making any rational point, your just using a meaningful word in a sentence without meaning. Watch I can change that one word and get the same meaning out of what you said making it pointless.
From a religious perspective:
The smart person knew that science was limited in answers and it is jesus that holds the greatest exploration.
From a new-age standpoint:
The smart person knew that science was limited in answers and it is The Universal Mind that holds the greatest exploration.
From a drug experimenter
The smart person knew that science was limited in answers and it is psychedelics that holds the greatest exploration.
Try explaining your reasoning instead of just stating such and such to be true by fiat.
And your last comment "I just meant to say that it appears limitless and therefor has a larger (infinite?) domain to explore." seems you don't understand reality much. your confusing Philosophy with Mysticism. go get an education - danggit, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Two of my personal favs of the bunch:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Antony Hoare Senior researcher at Microsoft Corporation
I would teach the world that scientists start by trying very hard to disprove what they hope is true. When they fail, they have a good reason for believing what they hope is true, and can even convince others of its truth. A scientist always acknowledges the possibility of error, and is less likely to be mistaken than one who always claims to be right.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
and
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Baum Emeritus professor of surgery and visiting professor of medical humanities at University College London, and chairman of the Psychosocial Oncology Committee of the National Cancer Research Institute
I would teach the world that science = imagination + humility². If only politicians were ruled by the scientific principles of conjectures (hypothesis generation) and refutations (controlled experimentation), then the world would be a better place. To quote the 19th-century British biologist Thomas Henry Huxley: "The tragedy of science is the slaying of a beautiful hypothesis by an ugly fact."
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- - hiPpymIck, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1information is not knowledge
.............................knowledge is not wisdom
.........................................................wisdom is not truth
.................................................................................truth is not beauty
...................................................................................................beauty is not love
.........................................................................................................................love is not music... (music is the best)
frank zappa - firepig, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Lots of wisdom in there. One point with which I would disagree is the one declaring science is value free. Well, maybe science is value free, but scientists come loaded with all sorts of baggage.
I encourage anyone who hasn't read it to go through Kuhn's Structure of Scientific Revolutions. The man who probably did the most to popularize the term paradigm talks quite a bit about how the advancement of science is anything but value free. - AniceAtheist, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1A quick but shallow explainer of DNA. it is exactly the same as machine language. it is digitally coded information. 99.999% of DNA on earth uses the exact same programming language. the DNA itself is not alive in any sense of the word (except it replicates)
A perfect example of genetic engineering is the so called Frost resistance 'software' that certain fish in the arctic evolved. Instead of our scientists having to create the genetic script from scratch they simply spliced it out of a fish and placed it into a tomato. Tomatoes now are more frost resistant. Best part is there weren't two languages (a la microsoft and apple) to get all confused about since all creatures share the same genetic structure.
I do agree that it should not be patentable for the exact same reasons music and literature aren't. And for those same reasons neither should software created from programming languages and/or machine code. - quickgold192, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2yeah, a lot of people don't understand that evolution through natural selection is true by definition.
- level, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Great read. One of the better articles submitted. Big thumbs up here. I am now more educated in a good way because of that article. I even saved the damn page.
- mahdaeng, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0excellent point:
[[
I would teach the world that science is not about truth, but is about trying to get closer to the truth. This is important because, too often, people look to scientists as having the "truth". What we have is wrapped in uncertainties, caveats and simplifications.
--Kathy Sykes
]]
science is not the be-all, end-all - it is a means to an end - an attempt to quantify how the universe operates in such a way that we can understand it
science is not truth, it is an approach to discovering truth
some other good points to remember:
[[
A scientist always acknowledges the possibility of error, and is less likely to be mistaken than one who always claims to be right.
--Antony Hoare
]]
[[
I would teach the world that science = imagination + humility².
--Michael Baum
]] - mahdaeng, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0philosophy is mainly about questions, religion about answers
sciences attempts to marry both questions and answers - Wonderkind, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Smart people? Of course.
Life lessons? Nope.
Just smart people defending their career choices. - barius, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1I almost dugg this, until I read the one about GM crops. As great as a GM plant *could* be, the whole idea of genetic modification has been completely railroaded by the legal implications of patenting such genetic 'designs'. Until we accept that living organisms are not patentable objects I refuse to support even the science behind it.
- iChuckles, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1@barius
"Philosophy cannot give any answers that science cannot give" WTF? Science won't give you answers to moral questions, but you can argue that philosophy can.
I agree that philosophy helps us think creatively, but it can and does go beyond that. Philosophy is everything when it comes to how we address science or anything. It can be a "point of view" and thus define the domain in which we work.
Personaly I don't think philosophy solves any of the really big questions about life and existance. You can argue that it cannot possibly do that, but then neither can science as you say. However, science is confined and I don't believe philosophy is. I didn't mean to say philosophy is better, than science at soving the worlds questions. I just meant to say that it appears limitless and therefor has a larger (infinite?) domain to explore. - dschwant, on 10/12/2007, -5/+3When I read Dawkins' comments, I am reminded what an amazing level of faith that guy has. I wish I had the faith to say, as he does, "I know it looks designed, but ignore that, because it really isn't".
- iChuckles, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0Well an interesting read I guess. I was stunned at how statements of certainty were made about things that were not certain. It may be just common every day conversational talk that makes that happen. But I would expect more truth and objectivity from scientists. If you can't get that from them, then who can you get it from?
Overall the one big flaw of science is that its test and results are trapped within our domain of abilities. But then we start to get into philosophy. The movie Red Planet sucked but it did make a good point. One person thought science was the end all be all. The smart person knew that science was limited in answers and it is philosophy that holds the greatest exploration.
Now where did I put my mushrooms.... - GrantTheGr8, on 10/12/2007, -7/+2or Manbearpig... beware
- wesamel, on 10/12/2007, -6/+1I apologize for my lame attempt at humor. I would have dugg me down too.
- wesamel, on 10/12/2007, -12/+0Did the first guy just compare me to a rat? I'm insulted.
- john2kx, on 10/12/2007, -19/+3that article almost put me out cold, but luckily I closed the window in time, just before i lost consciousness..
Dugg for the sole reason of discovering the single most boring page on the internet.
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is