Download Science in the Looking Glass: What Do Scientists Really by E. Brian Davies PDF

By E. Brian Davies

Davies (King's university, London), the developer of the idea of open quantum structures, argues-surprisingly for a mathematician -that math is a human production that Nature isn't ruled by way of; subjective recognition should be unexplainable; the main credible medical theories usually are the least mathematical; and philosophical matters are vital in technological know-how.

Show description

Read or Download Science in the Looking Glass: What Do Scientists Really Know? PDF

Best scientific-popular books

Science in the Looking Glass: What Do Scientists Really Know?

Davies (King's collage, London), the developer of the idea of open quantum platforms, argues-surprisingly for a mathematician -that math is a human production that Nature isn't ruled through; subjective awareness will be unexplainable; the main credible medical theories usually are the least mathematical; and philosophical concerns are very important in technology.

Cyberculture, cyborgs and science fiction: consciousness and the posthuman

Addressing a key factor regarding human nature, this e-book argues that the first-person adventure of natural awareness may perhaps quickly be lower than chance from posthuman biotechnology. In exploiting the mind's capability for instrumental habit, posthumanists search to increase human event through bodily projecting the brain outward in the course of the continuity of suggestion and the cloth global, as via telepresence and different kinds of prosthetic improvements.

Additional info for Science in the Looking Glass: What Do Scientists Really Know?

Sample text

I explain why current computers should not be regarded as conscious, and that we ourselves are conscious of only a small proportion of the activity in our brains. The fact that some of the deepest forms of processing are not conscious suggests that our thinking is not ultimately fully rational or under our control. The precise mechanisms which correspond to conscious experiences may well be found within the next few decades, but this does not necessarily mean that we will ever be able to duplicate consciousness in machines.

Unfortunately we have seen that twentieth century psychological research does not support this optimism. Our impression that we have a simple and direct awareness of the world and of our own thought processes are both illusions. By way of contrast Einstein rejected the idea that the nature of reality could be deduced by the application of human reason alone: At this point an enigma presents itself which in all ages has agitated enquiring minds. How can it be that mathematics, being after all a product of human thought which is independent of experience, is so admirably appropriate to the objects of reality?

30 Language Only after we have developed a sufficiently sophisticated language is it possible for us to formulate a sentence involving the number ‘four’. We are then correct to say ‘diplodocus had four legs’ because this provides a good match between what we see and the concepts which we have constructed. It has been put to me that if an alien civilization were found to have been counting before the human race evolved, that would prove that numbers exist independently of ourselves. While this is true, it is not terribly profound.

Download PDF sample

Rated 4.16 of 5 – based on 48 votes