What scientific concept would improve everybody's cognitive toolkit?
Jan. 19&24 update: built a cleaner user interface to the answers (on a new blog at worldquestionseriesplus.blogspot.com), and more (expanding the in-group (*), it does include Tobis's Coherence.)
I haven't read through all the answers yet; will likely add more highlights here once I've done so, or feel free to add your favorites in comments below.
Carlo Rovelli (Physicist) nominates The Uselessness of Certainty:
"There is a widely used notion that does plenty of damage: the notion of "scientifically proven". Nearly an oxymoron. The very foundation of science is to keep the door open to doubt. ... Failure to appreciate the value of the lack of certainty is at the origin of much silliness in our society. Are we sure that the Earth is going to keep heating up, if we do not do anything? ... Every knowledge, even the most solid, carries a margin of uncertainty. ... [If] from this lack of certainty we jump to the conviction that we better not care about global heating... well, we are simply stupid.
Better understanding of the meaning of probability, and especially realizing that we never have, nor need, 'scientifically proven' facts, but only a sufficiently high degree of probability, in order to take decisions and act, would improve everybody's conceptual toolkit."
Added 2011-01-24: Also see William Calvin's Find That Frame
Added 2011-01-17: Tobis adds the concept of Coherence:
... our ability to advance the truth is based fundamentally on our understanding the truth well enough to quickly discard most untruths. Constructing a realistic and productive perspective is a matter, like the sculptor removing all the marble that is not part of his subject, of getting good at throwing away the stuff that doesn't matter....[which is] is the stuff that is incoherent with what is already known.
Jan 19: & in comments there at Tobis's, I've added "Type I vs Type II errors" (link); though this answer may (still) already be among the ones provided.
Previous NCFocus posts on Edge's World Question Center, with favorite answers, in Jan 2004, Sept 2004, Jan 2005.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Welcome, and thanks for caring enough to donate your time and thoughts toward greater collective wisdom...
Terms of engagement:
* Please be civil.
* * * * Please do not post anonymously * * * (I'd remove this choice if I could, and I may remove your comment if you do) - instead, do this:
Click on the 'Name/URL' radiobutton, then enter your real name (if you're brave) or a pseudonym (if you're not). (You can leave the "URL" field blank.)
Or go ahead and click "Anonymous", but put your name in your comment.
* The Management reserves the right to delete comments (Moderation Certificate can be found here). You can always post it on a blog of your own.
If you run into technical difficulties, please a) accept my apologies, then b) email your comment to aherror2011 at gmail.com with "Comment for [name of this blog]" in the Subject line.
New policy re climate contrarianism comments as of 11/11/2009:
Comments questioning the climate science community's understanding of climate change (97% of active climatologists now believe that the earth is currently warming and that it's human-caused - link) will be deleted unless the commenter:
a) is local
b) uses his real name
c) provides link(s) to substantiate his claim(s)/inference(s)
d) is willing to collaborate on constructing an argument tree, to get us past the usual sterile point-counterpoint-countercounterpoint.
(For people who can't read the above, a summary:
1) Be civil;
2) Don't post w/o giving at least a pseudonym;
3) Don't espouse climate-denial crankery unless you're local and willing to stand behind it.)
Caveats:
1. Comments could be delayed: they are being moderated, and I'm sometimes away from the computer for a day or more.
2. : Perfectly legitimate comments are sometimes miscategorized (by the blogging platform) as spam, & not published. If this happens to yours, please notify me, else I might not notice for a day or two.