> But Newton still lives! Even for space shots to Mars, they still use
> Newton's mechanics to work out speeds, orbits and so forth. Einstein is
> still too fancy for NASA.
Just wait till we find our first wormhole!
Ed
----- Original Message -----
From: "Keith Hudson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Ed Weick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "Stephen Straker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Ray Evans Harrell"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 02, 2003 10:00 AM
Subject: But Newton lives! (was Re: [Futurework] RE: They were pretty dim
> Ed,
>
> At 08:19 02/09/03 -0400, you wrote:
> >Stephen, thank you for putting it all together in a thought provoking
little
> >package. Too bad it ain't necessarily so, or may be so in only a very
tiny
> >piece of the uncertain reality we have to deal with. I sometimes regret
> >that Einstein so thoroughly displaced Newton. Come back to the five and
> >dime, Isaac Newton, Isaac Newton!
> >
> >Ed
>
> But Newton still lives! Even for space shots to Mars, they still use
> Newton's mechanics to work out speeds, orbits and so forth. Einstein is
> still too fancy for NASA.
>
> (Newton was pretty good on the subject of gold coinage, too. Master of the
> Mint and all that. Rescued the population from the counterfeiters and coin
> clippers. And we wouldn't have had the nonsense of going off the gold
> standard either if he had been alive.)
>
> Keith
>
>
>
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Stephen Straker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >To: "Ray Evans Harrell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Sent: Tuesday, September 02, 2003 5:49 AM
> >Subject: Re: [Futurework] RE: They were pretty dim
> >
> >
> > > Hello Ray,
> > >
> > > > ... The childlike faith in mechanisms
> > > > that the Republicans have or profess is either idiocy or duplicity
(note
> >the
> > > > Wall Street Journal's recent conversion to re-regulation for the
power
> > > > companies in face of the failure of the "invisible economic hand").
> >The
> > > > "invisible hand" is the most ridiculous notion that I've seen to
date...
> > > > ... Nature isn't automatic but dynamic
> > > > and Laisse Faire whether in economics, education or the environment
is
> >an
> > > > excuse for intellectual laziness and irresponsibility. You have
to
> >plan,
> > > > think about the future of your grandchildren and the sustainability
of
> >the
> > > > present. I see little of such thought or action in the present in
any
> > > > quarter. That's my experience and opinion.
> > >
> > > Oh my goodness, Ray, you have targetted the *core*
> > > intellectual convictions of the European enlightenment,
> > > fundamental ideas and perceptions which endure as strong as
> > > ever to this day and lie behind almost all contemporary
> > > thought and politics.
> > >
> > > I wonder if I can successfully sketch these core
> > > commitments. What did Newton discover that was so celebrated
> > > by Voltaire? What has the commitment to modern science
> > > placed at the center of our beliefs? Newton discovered that
> > > the dynamic universe is kept in *order* by the operation of
> > > the laws ("rights"?) of motion of individual particles of
> > > matter, laws established by the same Provident God who,
> > > according to John Locke (Newton's colleague on the London
> > > Board of Trade), created those individual particles of
> > > society, *human* atoms, each endowed with innate "rights"
> > > ("natural laws"?) of life, liberty, and property. Newton and
> > > Locke make the world safe for what CB MacPherson famously
> > > called "the political theory of possessive individualism".
> > >
> > > A collection of material particles, each having its own
> > > inertial mass and the power of attracting every other
> > > particle (gravity), produces by these mechanical laws a
> > > *solar system* consisting of large aggregated bodies moving
> > > in stable dynamic orbits. A collection of individual human
> > > atoms, each seeking its own way, interact in such a way as
> > > to produce stable, progressive, social orders.
> > >
> > > The mechanism of the Newtonian universe is imitated in the
> > > mechanism of the market. And it is this FACT of MECHANISM
> > > that offers such eloquent testimony to the benevolent
> > > Providence of an all-wise Creator: the mechanism operates so
> > > that each of the individual particles just goes about its
> > > own business (moving, gravitating, seeking what it wants)
> > > with no larger vision in mind; the LAWS of the MECHANISM
> > > guarantee a natural and social ORDER as an outcome, a
> > > consequence of the interactions of these single-minded
> > > individuals each of them seeking no larger goal than
> > > individual well-being.
> > >
> > > "It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer,
> > > or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their
> > > regard to their own interest. We address ourselves, not to
> > > their humanity but to their self-love, and never talk to
> > > them of our own necessities but of their advantages. Nobody
> > > but a beggar chooses to depend chiefly upon the benevolence
> > > of his fellow-citizens" -- Adam Smith, Wealth of Nations, Bk
> > > I, Ch 2.
> > >
> > >
> > > The beauty of all this is that individuals do *NOT* need to
> > > worry about those things you are urging upon us. An
> > > individual is a model citizen of a modern republic if he
> > > simply looks after his own self-interests and responds
> > > rationally to his own individual needs. He does NOT
> > > > ... have to plan,
> > > > think about the future of [his] grandchildren and the sustainability
of
> >the
> > > > present...
> > >
> > > If he just looks out for himself, the *mechanisms* of the
> > > markets (in goods, in ideas, in political candidates) will
> > > take care of the greater economic, social, and political
> > > good.
> > >
> > > It is quite a powerful vision. Its founders (Newton, Locke,
> > > Voltaire) saw this as the establishment of a providential
> > > diety. As God gradually abandoned the scene -- "I have no
> > > need of that hypothesis, sire" says Laplace to the Emperor
> > > when asked where is God in his scheme of the solar system --
> > > the benevolence of the diety was replaced by a belief in the
> > > progressiveness & goodness inherent in nature.
> > >
> > > Thus from Adam Smith's progressive history of human
> > > civilization -- all of it driven by the "innate propensity
> > > to truck, barter, and exchange" of each individual human
> > > atom, Smith's counterpart to the innate gravitating tendency
> > > of each Newtonian atom -- it is a small step to *DARWIN*
> > > with his evolutionary MECHANISM whereby "more and more
> > > highly organized" living things are produced by the
> > > interaction of biological individuals having no larger goal
> > > than their own day-to-day survival.
> > >
> > > There is no greater testimony to "the West's" commitment to
> > > *individualism* and natural MECHANISMS than the current
> > > conviction that everything exists and everything has
> > > happened by the operation of *evolutionary* mechanisms. Thus
> > > nothing is explained or understood until its evolutionary
> > > origins or foundations have been uncovered: the current
> > > insistence on *evolutionary* explanations in anthropology,
> > > history, psychology, linguistics, cognitive development,
> > > education, economics (right here on FW!), and so on.
> > > And so we are the children of the Enlightment. ("What do you
> > > mean 'we', Mr European?" I hear Ray asking.)
> > >
> > > What is this legacy? The major thing, I think, is the
> > > *eclipse of politics* by the sciences of management and
> > > administration: a cultural commitment to utilitarian justice
> > > and ethics. I first encountered this conclusion in the
> > > eloquently argued *Politics and Vision* by Sheldon Wolin.
> > >
> > > The basic idea is this: since there are (natural)
> > > *mechanisms* that assure best results -- in nature, in
> > > biology, and in society -- the enlightened citizen abandons
> > > a sentimental and childish pursuit of godly justice or the
> > > anti-social ethics of the Sermon on the Mount and realizes
> > > that there are no ethical or political issues *as such*. All
> > > our social ills are discovered to be social problems of
> > > administration and *management* -- hence the prominence of
> > > "the economy" and managing the economy in modern politics.
> > > All else is subsidiary to this.
> > >
> > > I think that a realization of how deeply and unconsciously
> > > "we" are committed to this vision of things, to this
> > > mechanistic understanding of the natural and social worlds,
> > > goes a long way to explaining our behavior and our politics.
> > >
> > > There is much more that could be said and much detailed
> > > accounting to be given before any of this could be
> > > persuasive, but the basic picture seems pretty clear to me.
> > > And the problems with this basic picture *are* the basic
> > > problems of our current situation. We are in trouble to the
> > > extent and in the same ways that this mechanistic vision is
> > > in trouble.
> > >
> > > Perhaps this makes some sense of things ...
> > >
> > > Stephen Straker
> > >
> > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > Vancouver, B.C.
> > > [Outgoing mail scanned by Norton AntiVirus]
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Futurework mailing list
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >Futurework mailing list
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------
>
> Keith Hudson, General Editor, Handlo Music, http://www.handlo.com
> 6 Upper Camden Place, Bath BA1 5HX, England
> Tel: +44 1225 311636; Fax: +44 1225 447727; mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ________________________________________________________________________
>
_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
