Glen, etc. I took issue not with Feynman as a person, but with the off-quoted "aphorism", attributed to him, that scientists have no more use for philosophy of science than birds have for ornithology. The only reason birds don't have use for ornithology is that they can't read. I assume that that disability does not apply to the scientists mentioned in the aphorism.
Nick Nicholas S. Thompson Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology Clark University http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/ -----Original Message----- From: Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of g??? ? Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2017 3:03 PM To: FriAM <friam@redfish.com> Subject: [FRIAM] on Feynman, again Since we recently went 'round about quoting and criticizing people who quote Feynman, I thought this would be interesting. https://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=3488 > if you write, for example, that Richard Feynman was a self-aggrandizing > chauvinist showboater, then even if your remarks have a nonzero inner product > with the truth, you don’t thereby “transcend” Feynman and stand above him, in > the same way that set theory transcends and stands above arithmetic by > constructing a model for it. Feynman’s achievements don’t thereby become > your achievements. -- ☣ gⅼеɳ ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
