![]() ![]() (“Deeper” doesn't necessarily mean “in terms of ever smaller constituents,” by the way.) I guess that deeper theories will always reveal still deeper problems. Horgan: Do you believe in what Steven Weinberg has called a “final theory” in physics?ĭeutsch: No. I expect that once it does, we'll also realize that that way of asking the question is misleading. Horgan: Will science ever explain why there’s something rather than nothing?ĭeutsch: Science can't, but philosophy in the light of scientific theories could. Horgan: Do you ever wonder whether our universe is a simulation created by super-intelligent aliens?ĭeutsch: I reject all explanations involving the supernatural, including that one. Forster says and I especially do not believe in belief in science.” (Actually Forster's view was much more equivocal than Popper's on this.) As far as I am concerned ‘I do not believe in belief,’ as E. ![]() As Popper said: “I am opposed to the thesis that the scientist must believe in his theory. Namely: they're real – get over it.īut I think that belief is an irrational state of mind and I try to avoid it. Horgan: Do you really, truly, believe in existence of other universes, as implied by the many-worlds hypothesis?ĭeutsch: It's my opinion that the state of the arguments, and evidence, about other universes closely parallels that about dinosaurs. I'm even a little more so now than I was, because I see that the idea of it is catching on. I'm also “optimistic” in the sense that I expect progress to continue in the future. I think the arguments against that proposition are as untenable as ever. Horgan: Are you as optimistic now as when you wrote The Beginning of Infinity?ĭeutsch: What I call optimism is the proposition that all evils are due to a lack of knowledge, and that knowledge is attainable by the methods of reason and science. See also my follow-up post, Is Science Infinite? –John Horgan In fact, more often than not I found myself agreeing with him-or at the very least hoping that he's right.” My optimism has been flagging lately, so I reached out to Deutsch for a booster shot, and we had the following email exchange. “Deutsch makes the case for infinite progress with such passion, imagination and quirky brilliance,” I wrote, “that I couldn't help but enjoy his company. Although he critiques my book The End of Science, I found Deutsch’s radical optimism so fascinating that I gave Infinity a rave review. Those hypothetical universes branching off ours every instant really exist! In 2011 I immersed myself in Deutsch’s worldview when The Wall Street Journal asked me to review his book The Beginning of Infinity: Explanations that Transform the World, which argues that the quest for knowledge is infinite. He is renowned for his ideas about quantum computation, and for his insistence that the many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics is true. Physicist David Deutsch is such a thinker. They knock me so askew that the world gets weird again, in a good way. Some thinkers, even if I disagree with them, jolt me in a way I like.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |