Tuesday, January 02, 2007

Edge Question for 2007

John Brockman runs an interesting "blog" called the Edge. He has assembled a cadre of intellectuals, and people who aspire to be intellectuals. Most of them are authors and Brockman is their agent.

This year's question is ...

The Edge Annual Question — 2007
WHAT ARE YOU OPTIMISTIC ABOUT? WHY?
As an activity, as a state of mind, science is fundamentally optimistic. Science figures out how things work and thus can make them work better. Much of the news is either good news or news that can be made good, thanks to ever deepening knowledge and ever more efficient and powerful tools and techniques. Science, on its frontiers, poses more and ever better questions, ever better put.

What are you optimistic about? Why? Surprise us!
The results are fascinating [THE WORLD'S LEADING THINKERS SEE GOOD NEWS AHEAD]. I haven't picked a favorite 'cause there are so many good ones. Many of them focus on issues that we have been discussing here: issues such as the fight between rationalism and superstition, the meaning of science, and science education.

Do you have a favorite?
at

3 comments:

  1. Torbjörn LarssonTuesday, January 02, 2007 11:35:00 PM

    My favorite was Dennett ("The Evaporation of the Powerful Mystique of Religion"), with Rovelli ("The Divide Between Rational Scientific Thinking and the Rest of Our Culture Is Decreasing") behind, since their message was not only about embracing increased knowledge but also about abandoning hampering superstition. We need to do both to make the best of our future.

    ReplyDelete
  2. AnonymousWednesday, January 03, 2007 12:21:00 AM

    On my blog I focused on one of the rather utopian predictions and contrast it with another, more sober-headed optimism. They were both computer scientists.

    I think that I have to separate my technological optimism (as an engineer in training) from my general optimism for the future of rationality (as a ground-pounder in the fight against superstition). Among the former, David Gelernter's was probably my favorite. Among the latter, probably Dennett's.

    ReplyDelete
  3. ThosEMSaturday, January 06, 2007 1:36:00 PM

    My favorite was Lee Smolin's piece. I felt that he got right down to the nub of the religious matter with his contrasting of transcendence and immanence. He expressed it as the difference between attempting to control the future, and attempting to understand it well enough to go with the flow successfully. It's heartening to think folks may be onto the wisdom of the latter.

    ReplyDelete