Wednesday, November 24, 2021

958: The Big Change...

 Galilei was convicted of possible heresy in 1632 and  turned pope Urbanus VIII and the Jesuits from allies into opponents. No more publications about astronomy.


Ok, no more astronomy, then move on to the study of moving bodies in general. Thence he began to experiment with rolling metal balls from an inclined plane.


He began by telling that Aristotle claimed that object fall with a speed proportional to their weight. Big stones fall faster that small stones.


Galilei assumed that Aristotle never had come to this conclusion by doing experiments, so that he could have seen that he was wrong.. 


I'll safe you the mathematics, but the final result of Galilei using the empirical cycle, was the historical publication of a book on mechanics in 1637, groundbreaking math.


This was the result of his specific mindset, which you already could have learned from is publication in 1623 of "Il Saggiatore"


"The Assayer" (il Saggiatore) was a book published in Rome and is generally considered to be one of the pioneering works of the scientific method, 


first discussing the idea that the book of nature is to be read with mathematical tools rather than those of scholastic philosophy, as generally held at the time.


QUOTE - Philosophy [i.e. natural philosophy] is written in this grand book — I mean the Universe — which stands continually open to our gaze, 


but it cannot be understood unless one first learns to comprehend the language and interpret the characters in which it is written. 


It is written in the language of mathematics, and its characters are triangles, circles, and other geometrical figures, 


without which it is humanly impossible to understand a single word of it; without these, one is wandering around in a dark labyrinth.


You could not understand nature by studying the bible, like scholastics did, nor by studying the classics like the humanists did,


but you had to focus on experiments and describe these in the language of nature: mathematics.


This is the big change of thinking in patterns and principles, that emerged in those days and has become the most natural thing in our life today.


According Aristotle all reality was teleological. Every proces in nature strives for a goal. The moving object strives for rest, the seed strives for becoming a tree and so on.


René Descartes (1596 - 1650) didn't agree with this idea. In his "Discours de la Méthode" (1637) he focused on the notion of "clear and distinct ideas".


And one of the most influential ideas was, that everything in nature was a matter of cause and effect relation, that all could be mathematically described.


Descartes' ideas had an enormous impact on early modern science: they led to a research program in which the human body, but not the human soul, 


was seen as a machine, just like the earth, the planetary system and the universe as a whole.


Everything was subject to causal laws of nature. Non-causal descriptions were rejected. 


His philosophical idea, that nature is subject to natural laws that are the same everywhere and always, is still our view. 


But this way of thinking provoked fierce reactions. After all, if everything could be explained by natural laws, without intervention from God, was there still room for a supreme being?


And so here you witness what is perhaps the most drastic step in thinking in terms of patterns and principles: the mechanization of our world view.


Thank you for your attention....


MacMillan The Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2nd edition
Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 1995
Rens Bod: "Een Wereld vol Patronen".  2019

The Discussion


[13:13] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): and the church screamed in rage NOOO NOOOO NOOOOO!

[13:13] .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): Thank you Herman

[13:14] herman Bergson: Yes but yet it is a breaking point in human history

[13:14] Medussa Reddevil: Thank you Herman and Hello! everybody I missed.

[13:14] Ian Newt: That way of thinking seems to still evoke fierce reactions to this day

[13:14] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): yep

[13:14] herman Bergson: Oh yes Ian

[13:14] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): true

[13:15] Medussa Reddevil: Maybe not so much in Europe but in the US?

[13:15] herman Bergson: there is even a kind of anti science if science is just another opinion about reality

[13:15] herman Bergson: I agree Medussa

[13:15] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): hmm

[13:15] herman Bergson: What I here from Americans is often horrible

[13:16] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): IN GOD WE TRUST

[13:16] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): their slogan for everything (almost)

[13:16] Ian Newt: well.... it is sort of an opinion about reality, isn't it? I mean, our understanding of reality keeps changing all the time.

[13:16] herman Bergson: Only to some extend, I'd say Ian....

[13:17] herman Bergson: I see the changes more in a progressing deeper understanding of reality by science

[13:17] Ian Newt: I suppose it depends on our definition of the word 'opinion'.

[13:17] herman Bergson: Well...

[13:17] herman Bergson: we could say that an opinion is a point of view based on testable arguments

[13:18] Medussa Reddevil: What about facts?

[13:18] Medussa Reddevil: because an opinion is a fact?

[13:18] herman Bergson: a fact is an observable item or even in reality, which can be testedon its real existence

[13:19] herman Bergson: event

[13:19] herman Bergson: For instance.....

[13:19] herman Bergson: A human being can not fly by itself....

[13:19] herman Bergson: is that a fact, an opinion?

[13:19] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): nope, we need a machine

[13:19] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): then we can fly

[13:19] herman Bergson: ok...test it

[13:20] Ian Newt: And yet people argue over facts all the time, so there seems to be wide disparity in viewpoints.

[13:20] herman Bergson: stand on a sky scraper and everyone who does not accept this FACT may step over the edge and fly

[13:20] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): WEEEEEEEEEEE SPLAT!

[13:21] herman Bergson: ahhh....often an opinion is regarded to be just a relative truth

[13:21] Medussa Reddevil: But those who deny facts is not because they don´t have information, but they want to ignore it. That´s an opinion I guess.

[13:21] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): like the flat earthers pfff

[13:21] Medussa Reddevil: exactly

[13:21] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): indeee

[13:21] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): dd

[13:22] herman Bergson: opinion then is a point of view of which the truthvalue only depends on the person that upholds the opinion

[13:22] Ian Newt: I used to be certain that people landed on the moon in 1969. I watched it on TV, live, and I believed it.

[13:22] Ian Newt: But what proof do I really have?

[13:22] herman Bergson: the proof is simple.....

[13:22] Medussa Reddevil: I don´t think the man landed in the Moon, THAT day

[13:23] herman Bergson: send a probe to the moon and have  it photograph the lander that remained there and the footprints that are still there and the tire tracks

[13:23] .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): and the flag

[13:24] herman Bergson: ah yes...

[13:24] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): also u can shoot a laser at the moon and get a reflection back from a mirror like thing placed there

[13:24] Ian Newt: But I would still be in the position of believing the people who would claim to have sent that probe to make those photographs.

[13:24] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): Mythbusters did that

[13:24] .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): moonbouncing:)

[13:24] herman Bergson: sure you can claim that....but then you also must have irrefutable proof of the truth of your clainm, Ian

[13:25] herman Bergson: The funny thing is....

[13:25] Ian Newt: But I'm not claiming that it didn't happen... only that my only 'proof' that it did happen is what others have told me, and some images I saw on the TV.

[13:25] herman Bergson: People say....They didnt land on the moon.....was all fake....

[13:26] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): pffffs1

[13:26] herman Bergson: That doesn't disprove anything

[13:27] herman Bergson: and if that is your only proof than you have informed yourself very poorly about the subject

[13:27] Ian Newt: If it was faked, it certainly would have been an incredibly complex undertaking. The scale of such an operation makes it less likely to be possible, in my opinion.

[13:28] Ian Newt: If I apply Occam's Razor to this thought, I can only deduce that it's more likely that it happened than that it was faked.

[13:28] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): indeed, i mean computer graphics did not even exist back then, the very first IC powered computer was in the moon-lander

[13:28] herman Bergson: There is that movie....I think it is  about a faked trip to Mars....forgot the title

[13:28] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): otherwise computers were big as rooms and strictly for buisness use

[13:28] Medussa Reddevil: I think I have seen that movie :)

[13:29] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): ok

[13:29] Ian Newt: Computer graphics didn't exist when 2001 A Space Odyssey was filmed, and yet... look at it.

[13:30] herman Bergson: Yes...

[13:30] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): its an amazing task they pulled off

[13:30] herman Bergson: But back to fact and opinion.....

[13:31] herman Bergson: Around 1650 science became an empirical science based on mathematics

[13:31] herman Bergson: It shaped our lives of today

[13:32] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): ah

[13:32] herman Bergson: and now we live in a world where that science is even questioned and facts can be replaced by alternative facts

[13:32] herman Bergson: it is amazing

[13:32] Medussa Reddevil: I get very frustrated by that

[13:32] Ian Newt: If I can't experience something directly, with my 5 senses, then I have to believe what someone else tells me.

[13:32] herman Bergson: Yes it is also an emotional issue...

[13:33] Ian Newt: I can take someone's scientific experiment and repeat it myself, and see for myself that it's true. Then I have proved it for myself.

[13:33] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): hmmm

[13:33] Ian Newt: but if I can't conduct the experiment then I have to take it on faith, so to speak.

[13:33] herman Bergson: Just think for only one minute about what you really KNOW by personal experience and what you KNOW because someone taught you something

[13:34] Ian Newt: Aren't those two different types of knowledge?

[13:34] herman Bergson: I think 90% of our individual personal knowledge (about reality) is knowledge based on authority

[13:34] Medussa Reddevil: But maybe, the fast advance of science make some theories that we are still using now, as obsoletes?

[13:35] Ian Newt: I agree with you in principle, not sure about the percentage.

[13:35] herman Bergson: That happens all the time Medussa

[13:35] Ian Newt: Yes Medussa, good point.

[13:35] herman Bergson: Is just a guess, Ian ^_^

[13:36] herman Bergson: Just look at the empirical cycle...

[13:37] herman Bergson: You have a far it is what we know about something....then you try a new hypothesis and test it

[13:37] herman Bergson: It can show that your theory was wrong and that you have to adjust it, or develop e new theory

[13:38] herman Bergson: That is the process in human thinking that started around 1650

[13:38] Medussa Reddevil: I think is a great process

[13:39] Ian Newt: Sure, once we learn it we use it all the time in one way or another.

[13:39] herman Bergson: The process is well documented by Thomas Kun in his book "The structure of scientific revolution (1962)"

[13:41] herman Bergson: It began with Karl Popper's "The Logic of scientific Discovery" (1934)

[13:41] herman Bergson: Simply said  his thesis was....

[13:41] herman Bergson: Don't try to confirm an observation....try to falsify it

[13:42] Medussa Reddevil: interesting

[13:42] herman Bergson: For instance...the thesis All swans are white....

[13:42] Ian Newt: If you can't falsify it, that doesn't mean it's true. But if you can prove it, then it's true.

[13:42] herman Bergson: what do you do to establish the truth of this statement....loooking for more white swans?

[13:43] Ian Newt: ?

[13:43] herman Bergson: That increases only its probability of being true...

[13:43] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): yep

[13:43] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): u need to look for the black ones

[13:43] Medussa Reddevil: or brown

[13:43] herman Bergson: So....find simply one swan that sin't white and you know that "all swans are white" is a false statement

[13:44] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): ah

[13:44] Ian Newt: I agree.

[13:44] Medussa Reddevil: I see.

[13:44] herman Bergson: If you can't falsify it, that doesn't mean it's true......interesting remark.....

[13:44] Ian Newt: But what about the statement: People landed on the moon in 1969?

[13:44] herman Bergson: what does it say....

[13:45] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): that we landed on the moon

[13:46] herman Bergson: hmmm...if you can't falsify a statement of fact, then such a statement cant have a truth value, I'd say

[13:46] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): but only way to proove it is to look for objects actually on the moon

[13:46] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): that we left there

[13:46] Medussa Reddevil: It´s like after death, you can´t say what´s going on in there, in my opinion

[13:46] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): but there is, the flag, that mirror ect

[13:46] Ian Newt: Good example, Medussa.

[13:46] herman Bergson: oops Medussa...that is a big statement with otns of implications

[13:47] herman Bergson: tons

[13:47] Ian Newt: Yes, if a statement cannot be proven false, then it might be true.

[13:47] herman Bergson: is presuposes a lot before you can talk about "something after death"

[13:47] Medussa Reddevil: Is not like the not white swan?

[13:47] herman Bergson: or might be false

[13:48] herman Bergson: one black swan tells you that the statement that all swans are white is 100% false

[13:48] Medussa Reddevil: but you had to find the black swan first

[13:48] herman Bergson: like 1 + 1  is always and everywhere 2

[13:48] Medussa Reddevil: lol I think so... maybe I am too tired lol

[13:48] herman Bergson: yes...that is the job of science

[13:49] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): hmm

[13:49] herman Bergson: but for the after death issue we need a lot of ingredients :-)

[13:49] herman Bergson: a definition of life

[13:49] herman Bergson: of something that "survives" death

[13:50] herman Bergson: a place or state that is this "happening something"

[13:51] herman Bergson: I guess we run out of time for  working that all out

[13:51] Medussa Reddevil: lol I guess

[13:51] Medussa Reddevil: :)

[13:51] Medussa Reddevil: Too complex

[13:51] Ian Newt: That's a topic worthy of discussion though.

[13:51] herman Bergson: But it is a legitimate matter of debate

[13:51] Medussa Reddevil: :D

[13:51] herman Bergson: I agree, Ian

[13:52] Medussa Reddevil: Is an opnion, waiting to become a fact

[13:52] herman Bergson: We even are not sure when we may call a human being

[13:52] herman Bergson: lol

[13:52] bergfrau Apfelbaum: lol+

[13:52] herman Bergson: sorry

[13:52] Medussa Reddevil: heheh

[13:52] herman Bergson: lolol

[13:52] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako):

[13:53] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): haha

[13:53] bergfrau Apfelbaum: *** haa hahaha ha ***

[13:53] herman Bergson: guess I have a gesture active that responds to the word DXXD

[13:53] Medussa Reddevil: LOL

[13:53] bergfrau Apfelbaum: lol

[13:53] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): looks like one of my breakdance poses

[13:53] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako):

[13:53] Medussa Reddevil: haha

[13:53] herman Bergson: This ends our converstation.....

[13:53] herman Bergson: lol

[13:54] herman Bergson: Thank you all again...^_^

[13:54] Medussa Reddevil: you going to wrinkle the suit lol

[13:54] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): ok u can stop hiding behind the desk 

[13:54] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): hehe

[13:54] herman Bergson: Class dismissed ...

[13:54] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): great again

[13:54] bergfrau Apfelbaum: was very interesting again! thank you Herman and class:-)

[13:54] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): some new stuff to think about

[13:54] .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): don't touch me i will be death

[13:54] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako):

[13:54] Medussa Reddevil: Thank you Professor :D fantastic time :) Nice to meet you all again

[13:54] Ian Newt: Interesting lecture and discussion herman.

[13:55] herman Bergson: you're always welcome Medussa

[13:55] herman Bergson: thank you Ian

[13:55] .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): it was a fantastic lecture Herman

[13:55] herman Bergson: I spend 30 years of my life in education :-))

[13:55] .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): thank you

[13:55] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): YAY! (yay!)

[13:56] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): oki where to?

[13:56] herman Bergson: I just still love it ^_^

[13:56] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): aaa great          

No comments:

Post a Comment