🚀 go-pugleaf

Bruce Sinclair wrote:
> 
> In article <2mn9p5Fohgn8U2@uni-berlin.de>, Dirk Bruere at Neopax <dirk@neopax.com> was seen to type:
> >Gregory L. Hansen wrote:
> >
> >> In article <235c483f.0407201549.681ffa4@posting.google.com>,
> >> Jeff Lanfield <jlanfield2003@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>>I am writing a paper on how new ideas gain acceptance in science. I
> >>>would like to get opinions on what were the most profound books and
> >>>thinkers on scientific epistemology you have encountered.
> >>>
> >>>By  this I mean a work that totally changed the way you look at the
> >>>world and at science.
> >>
> >> None.  My understanding of science has evolved slowly, from numerous
> >> sources and personal experiences.  It's shuffled and stumbled forward as I
> >> slowly grasp concepts on the fourth attempt at general relativity,
> >> fifth attempt at quantum field theory, or whatever.  There are certainly
> >> some very good and useful books, but I can't say I've read any that, as
> >> you say, have totally changed the way I look at the world and at science.
> >
> >Well, for me Neuromancer came close when it first came out.
> >In general, SF.
> 
> Yes ... much SF. It encourages the use of imagination.
> For me, probably the JG ballard ones and the phillip dick book with
> "ice 9" in it (been a long time since I read that so this is IIRC :)
> ). Apply the precautionary prionciple ... always :)

"Ice-9" is Vonnegut.  Vonnegut writes about wry social
dysfunction, Dick writes about damning perceptual ambiguity.

--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
 (Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz.pdf