Chronology Current Month Current Thread Current Date
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Prev] [Date Next]

[Phys-l] Bees and the nature of science. Was: Re: The Myths of Innovation



"As far back as 1865 Claude Bernard ([1865] 1957, p. 80) warned against such a teleological attitude: "The nature of our mind leads us to seek the essence or the why of things . . . experience soon teaches us that we cannot get beyond the how, i.e., beyond the immediate cause or the necessary conditions of phenomena" (emphasis Bernard's)"

Reading the above reminded me of JD's similar exhortations.

The above is from Adrian Wenner *. The article relates to Hakes diffusion of innovation below.

Also AW relates the stultifying effect of "appeal to authority. Finally:

Bernard ([1865] 1957, p. 39) addressed that approach as well: "If men discuss and experiment . . . to prove a preconceived idea in spite of everything, they no longer have freedom of mind, and they no longer search for truth." See also Karl Popper's (1957; cited by Wenner and Wells, 1990, p. 22) comment on that point.


* http://www.beesource.com/pov/wenner/jib2002.htm

bc, notes the statue of Claude Bernard at the entrance of the "Collège de France".

p.s. Adrian had great difficulty "getting published" until von Frisch died. (personal communication)

Richard Hake wrote:

Research on innovation diffusion (or lack thereof) of the type discussed by:


cut

BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
Every great idea in history has the fat red stamp of rejection on its face. It's hard to see today because once ideas gain acceptance, we gloss over the hard paths they took to get there. If you scratch any innovation's surface, you'll find the scars: they've been roughed up and thrashed around-by both the masses and leading minds- before they made it into your life. Paul C. Lauterbur, cowinner of the . . . . [2003 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine <http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/medicine/laureates/2003/press.html> for discoveries concerning "magnetic resonance imaging," whose seminal 1973 paper on magnetic resonance imaging was originally rejected by "Nature," is quoted by Davis (2007) as stating] . . . . "You can write the entire history of science in the last 50 years in terms of papers rejected by "Science" or "Nature." Big ideas in all fields endure dismissals, mockeries, and persecutions (for them and their creators). . . . .
BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB

I have not read Berkin's book, but it has been highly praised by:

a. John Seely Brown <http://www.johnseelybrown.com/>, former Chief

cut

Richard Hake, Emeritus Professor of Physics, Indiana University
24245 Hatteras Street, Woodland Hills, CA 91367
<rrhake@earthlink.net>
<http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~hake>
<http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~sdi>

"Difficulties of Change: . . . 9. The PRIMA FACIE AFFRONT: Whereas I have spent a significant fraction of my professional life perfecting my lectures and otherwise investing conscientiously in the status quo, therefore to suggest an alternative is, by definition, to attack
me."
Robert Halfman, Margaret MacVicart, W.T. Martin, Edwin Taylor, and
Jerrold Zacharias (1977).

REFERENCES
Berkun, S. 2007. "The Myths of Innovation," O'Reilly Media.

cut