Skip to main content

Is it safe to stand on a giant's shoulders?



If we want to be prime movers we must dare to think independently. The man named Sir Isaac Newton was the man who created the first gravitational theory. Newton also explained that light had two forms particle and wave motion. But we forget one thing. 

When Newton started his career, there were no gravitational theories and Newtonian mechanics. Being a prime mover makes it possible that a person makes mistakes. But if the person is successful. That brings gold and glory to that person. And guess how many errors Newton made before he published some of his theories?

The key element in philosophy is just to learn to ask "why?".  We can always copy texts written by Popper or Aristotle. But when we try to create something new. We must dare to write something. That some famous philosophers did not write earlier. There is one thing that we must understand. Even the most famous philosophers once wrote their first text. 

Sir Isaac Newton said he made great things because he stood on the giant's shoulders. Then we might ask how safe is to stand on a giant's shoulder. Should we rather follow other people? Should we always follow other people's thoughts? 

Or repeat other people's ideas rather than make our ideas? So if we want to make something great, like some new theory we must dare to stand on the giant's shoulder. Maybe our ideas are sometimes unpractical. Or maybe, they are far away from possible. 

And that means people are telling us that our idea is not working. Or our new idea is not suitable for mass production. But otherwise, those ideas were ours. They were and are something that came to my mind. When we think about safe models like writing some other people's ideas some other people like my own teachers could or some other philosophers might ask, "should I loan Plato's book, or should I read your thoughts?". 

The fact is that I was in the philosophy course, and if I wanted to pass that course, I must write my ideas. I know that everybody can copy texts made by Aristotle, Newton, or Voltaire. But fewer people can write their own opinions and justify them by using accepted rhetoric. This is the idea of philosophy. What if Newton thought that he must follow other people's texts? And what if that man just summarized them? 

The fact is that nobody ever heard of Sir Isaac Newton, the man who invented Newton's telescope, gravitation, and derivative-integral calculations. Nobody ever heard the idea that the universe is like a clock and God would not willingly intervene in what's going on here. Without being willing to make their texts, men and women like Newton would be the only man on earth. 

When we are thinking about people who sympathize with the Russian attack on Ukraine. And their connection with vaccine resistance, we can say that vaccines can protect people against biological weapons. But that's only my own opinion. The thing is that the philosophical way to think is different than everyday thinking. philosophical thinking is deeper than regular thinking. And the key question is: does something has some kind of thing that is not open to us? 

The classic example of a philosophical way to think is this. When our professor comes to the class there is a glass of water on his table. Then we must ask a question: is that liquid water? And if there is water, why that glass is on the table? 

When we look at people, who are against their benefit, we must ask about the motive for that kind of behavior. Why did somebody do something? Whose benefit do the anti-vaccine attitudes serve? 

Why that thing causes so big polemics? Why do those things raise so strong opinions? Those things are interesting. 


https://bigthink.com/thinking/shoulders-of-qiants/


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The LK-99 could be a fundamental advance even if it cannot reach superconductivity in 400K.

The next step in superconducting research is that LK-99 was not superconducting at room temperature. Or was it? The thing is that there is needed more research about that material. And even if it couldn't reach superconductivity in 400K that doesn't mean that material is not fundamental. And if LK-99 can maintain its superconductivity in 400K that means a fundamental breakthrough in superconducting technology.  The LK-99 can be hype or it can be the real thing. The thing is, anyway, that high-voltage cables and our electric networks are not turning superconducting before next summer. But if we can change the electric network to superconducting by using some reasonable material. That thing can be the next step in the environment. Superconductors decrease the need to produce electricity. But today cooling systems that need lots of energy are the thing that turn superconductors that need low temperatures non-practical for everyday use.  When the project begins there is lots of ent

Black holes, the speed of light, and gravitational background are things that are connecting the universe.

 Black holes, the speed of light, and gravitational background are things that are connecting the universe.  Black holes and gravitational waves: is black hole's singularity at so high energy level that energy travels in one direction in the form of a gravitational wave.  We normally say that black holes do not send radiation. And we are wrong. Black holes send gravitational waves. Gravitational waves are wave movement or radiation. And that means the black holes are bright gravitational objects.  If we can use water to illustrate the gravitational interaction we can say that gravitational waves push the surface tension out from the gravitational center. Then the other quantum fields push particles or objects into a black hole. The gravitational waves push energy out from the objects. And then the energy or quantum fields behind that object push them into the gravitational center.  The elementary particles are quantum fields or whisk-looking structures. If the gravitational wave is

The CEO of Open AI, Sam Altman said that AI development requires a similar organization as IAEA.

We know that there are many risks in AI development. And there must be something that puts people realize that these kinds of things are not jokes. The problem is how to take control of the AI development. If we think about international contracts regarding AI development. We must realize that there is a possibility that the contract that should limit AI development turns into another version of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. That treaty didn't ever deny the escalation of nuclear weapons. And there is a big possibility that the AI-limitation contracts follow the route of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.  The biggest problem with AI development is the new platforms that can run every complicated and effective code. That means the quantum computer-based neural networks can turn themselves more intelligent than humans. The AI has the ultimate ability to learn new things. And if it runs on the quantum-hybrid system that switches its state between binary and quantum states,