> -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Robert J. Chassell > Sent: Sunday, April 16, 2006 8:59 AM > To: brin-l@mccmedia.com > Subject: three paradigm shifts?
> Were there three major paradigm shifts? I go further back than Dan. > Over the course of human history, were there three paradigm shifts > implying four paradigms? The shifts would be > 1. from foraging and hunting to agriculture and herding, > 2. from agriculture and herding to mechanics and electric power, > 3. from mechanics and electric power to biological and computational > activities. I've took a bit of time to think about this, and see some problems with these broad outlines. When I look at three paradigms of physics, there is extensive documentation of each paradigm and the shifts between paradigms. In the West, the three paradigms are fairly well documented. I've taken two semester courses on original Classical works: one on Plato and Aristotle and one on Thomas Aquinas. My senior thesis in college was on interpreting Quantum Mechanics using Aristotle's philosophy. So, I think I have at least a fair understanding of this worldview by reading (translated) original works. My point here is not to boast about the extent of my studying....but to point out what is available to be studies. We have a fairly extensive library of classical writings. We do not have any real library of writings by hunter-gatherer tribes. Our present knowledge is rather limited. In addition, it isn't clear to me that the difference between nomads that follow a herd and nomads that lead herds is more significant than that between nomads and city dwellers. So, the first step is uncertain. In addition, the last two proposed shifts aren't as clearly demarcated as the physics shifting. For example, water mills had been used as a source of mechanical power for over 2000 years, while electric power has been used for less than 150 years. The Greeks and Romans had rather complex gearing (e.g. the Roman mile marker required fairly sophisticated gearing.) Our economy has certainly changed with the prevalence of computers, and there are differences in how we view things than how people 50 years ago viewed things. But, simpler computers have existed for a long time, and the Turing machine goes back 70 years, compared to the 140 years for Maxwell's equations. Further, we still find strong neo-Classical influences in popular culture. For example, two of the biggest movie series (Lord of the Rings and Narnia) are based on books by rather opinionated neoclassicists. Thus, I would argue that our culture has not experienced paradigm shifts in the manner that paradigm shifts are seen in physics. In physics, Kepler's laws provided a simple explanation for planetary motion, perfect circles require an infinite number of epicycles. A mechanistic aether cannot fit E&M. Classical real objects are inconsistent with the experimental results of QM. Having said that, I don't wish to argue that there haven't been shifts in viewpoint over the last 2500 years. Clearly there have been shifts. I'm just arguing that the shifts are analog, compared to the digital paradigm shifts in physics. I'll try to get to the rest of your post later, but that's a start at least. Dan M. _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
