Article View: sci.philosophy.tech
Article #255Re: Science vs Philosophy of
From: Barry Merriman
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 01:43
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 01:43
23 lines
1404 bytes
1404 bytes
In article <1992Aug27.173559.12442@galois.mit.edu> tycchow@riesz.mit.edu (Timothy Y. Chow) writes: > > If I am not mistaken, Bohr and Einstein (and Einstein in particular) viewed > themselves as trying to understand the True Nature of things. Einstein's > obejctions to quantum theory were motivated primarily by deep-seated > feelings about what reality is like Absolutely---and was not this divergence the point at which his productive scientific career ended? As someone once said, if Einstein had retired and gone fishing in 1925, it would have made no difference to theoretical physics. He was crippled by his inability to accept QM (even tho he was one of its originators!). The fact that Einstein let his philosphical biases prejudice him against QM is an excellent example of the perils of the philosophical way of knowing things. -- Barry Merriman UCLA Dept. of Math UCLA Inst. for Fusion and Plasma Research barry@math.ucla.edu (Internet; NeXTMail is welcome)
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<1992Aug28.014351.4993@math.ucla.edu>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!stanford.edu!rutgers!ucla-cs!ucla-ma!newsReferences:
<1992Aug27.173559.12442@galois.mit.edu>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!stanford.edu!rutgers!ucla-cs!ucla-ma!news From: barry@arnold.math.ucla.edu (Barry Merriman) Newsgroups: sci.philosophy.tech Subject: Re: Science vs Philosophy of Message-ID: <1992Aug28.014351.4993@math.ucla.edu> Date: 28 Aug 92 01:43:51 GMT References: <1992Aug27.173559.12442@galois.mit.edu> Sender: news@math.ucla.edu Organization: UCLA, Mathematics Department Lines: 23