| "WHAT HAVE YOU CHANGED YOUR MIND
ABOUT?" |
Was
läuft hier richtig?
Der neue Optimi
smus
der Wissenschaften kommt gerade zur rechten Zeit
RALF
BÖNT |
C'est la double question posée par John Brockman, éditeur
de Edge à plus de 160 "penseurs de la troisième
culture, ces savants et autres penseurs du monde empirique
qui, par leur travail ou leurs écrits prennent la
place des intellectuels traditionnels en rendant visibles
les sens profonds de nos vies, en redéfinissant autant
qui nous sommes que ce que nous sommes".
Ça change des unes constamment catastrophiques
de nos médias habituels. |
But when the scientific thinkers look beyond their own specializations
to the big picture, they continue to find cause for cheer — foreseeing
an end to war, for example, or the simultaneous solution
of our global warming and energy problems. The most general
grounds for optimism offered by these thinkers, though,
is that big-picture pessimism so often proves to be unfounded. |
 Global
warming, the war on terror and rampant consumerism getting
you down? Well, lighten up: here, 17 of the world's smartest
scientists and academics share their reasons to be cheerful |
Brockman's respondents were forward-looking, describing
cutting-edge research that will help combat global warming
and other looming problems. |
How Doomed Are We?
Edgie's Chris
Anderson of TED and Robert
Provine of University of Maryland as
the proponents of optimism on program concerning
Optimism and the Doomsday Clock |
a titillating
compilation |
Peering into their crystal telescopes, the world's leading
scientists see a magnificent future |
El foro virtual Edge propone buscar razones, no simplemente
deseos, para el optimismo. Edge es un club que reúne,
segén ellos mismos, algunas de las mentes más
interesantes del mundo. Su propósito es estimular
discusiones en las fronteras del conocimiento. La intención
es llegar al borde del conocimiento mundial, acercándose
a las mentes más complejas y refinadas, juntarlas
en un foro y hacerlos que se pregunten las preguntas
que ellos mismos se hacen. La fundación actúa,
de este modo, como surtidora de problemas y alojamiento
de réplicas. Cada ano se constituye como Centro
Mundial de Preguntas. |
God bless those upbeat scientists |
Looking
through rose-colored microscopes
Why some scientists are optimistic
about the future
|
One way or another the answers should give you a warm
glow — either because you agree, or because they
make you angry. |
Edge's future-themed article is making some news....
From the lips of contributors to the online magazine
Edge to God's ears (one wonders if She or It may be listening):
dozens of scientists and other thinkers have looked ahead
to the future. |
a Web site that aims to bridge the gap between scientists
and other thinkers |
[E]ven in the face of such threats as global warming and
religious fundamentalism, scientists remain positive about
the future. |
People's fascination for religion and superstition will
disappear within a few decades as television and the internet
make it easier to get information, and scientists get closer
to discovering a final theory of everything, leading thinkers
argue today. |
What are you optimistic about? Why? Tons of brilliant thinkers
respond. |
 What
Are You Optimistic About?
Posted by Hemos on Monday January 01, @08:43AM
from the explain-yourself dept. |
Intellectual impresario John Brockman puts his annual
Edge question to
leading thinkers. |
What are you optimistic about? Intellectual
impresario John Brockman puts his annual Edge question
to leading thinkers...
|
[A]ccording to Edge — the heady website for world-class
scientists and thinkers, and the brainchild of author and
entrepreneurial idea man, John Brockman, there's good news
ahead. |
KYUNG HANG (Soeul)
The
great
world-wide
scholars
talk
about
their
'dangerous
ideas'.
|
Most of the contributors appear to have
interpreted "dangerous" as
meaning something like "subversive," challenging
to one or another received orthodoxy. |
Meine
gefährlichste Idee. Seit nunmehr
neun Jahren startet die Stiftung Edge
mit einer Umfrage zu einem großen
generellen Thema ins neue Jahr. |
Crónicas
Bárbaras Ciencia racista, atractiva
pero muy peligrosa. |
(Sydney)
Into the minds of the believers. With
the aim of gathering ideas from the
world's leading thinkers on intellectual,
philosophical, artistic and literary
issues, US writer John Brockman established
The Edge Foundation in 1988. |
Royal
Society president Martin Rees said the
most dangerous idea was public concern
that science and technology were running
out of control. |
Audacious
Knowledge. What is a dangerous idea?
One not assumed to be false, but possibly
true?What do you believe is true even
though you cannot prove it?" |
Seductive
power of a hazardous idea. The responses
to Brockman's question do not directly
engage with each other, but they do worry
away at a core set of themes. |
Academics
see gene cloning perils, untamed global
warming and personality-changing drugs
as presenting the gravest dangers for
the future of civiliztion |
Risky
ideas; What do scientists currently regard
as the most dangerous thoughts? |
Be
Afraid. Edge.org canvassed scientists for
their "most dangerous idea." David
Buss, a psychologist at the University
of Texas, chose "The Evolution of
Evil." |
The
most dangerous idea. Brockman's challenge
is noteworthy because his buddies include
many of the world's greatest scientists:
Freeman Dyson, David Gelertner, J. Craig
Venter, Jared Diamond, Brian Greene. |
Dangerous
Ideas About Modern Life. Free will does
not exist. We are not always created
equal. Science will never be able to
address our deepest concerns. |
Genome
sequencing pioneer Craig Venter suggests
greater understanding of how genes influence
characteristics such as personality,
intelligence and athletic capability
could lead to conflict in society. |
The
wilder shores of creativity. He asked
his roster of thinkers [...] to nominate
an idea, not necessarily their own, they
consider dangerous not because it is
false, but because it might be true. |
From cloning to predetermination of sex:
the answers of investigators and philosophers
to a question on the online salon Edge. |
Who
controls humans? God? The genes? Or nevertheless
the computer? The on-line forum Edge
asked its yearly question — and
the answers raised more questions. |
La
pregunta de l'any. La web Edge.org penjarà l'1
de gener la pregunta de l'any. La del
2005 va ser resposta per 120 ments de
l'anomenada 'tercera cultura', que van
reflexionar sobre l'enunciat "Què creus
que és veritat tot i no poder-ho
demostrar?" |
THE HANKYOREH (Seoul)
 |
The
117 respondents include Richard Dawkins,
Freeman Dyson, Daniel Dennett, Jared
Diamond — and that's just the
D's! As you might expect, the submissions
are brilliant and very controversial. |
Gene
discoveries highlight dangers facing
society. Mankind's increasing understanding
of the way genes influence behaviour
and the issue's potential to cause ethical
and moral dilemmas is one of the biggest
dangers facing society, according to
leading scientists. |
Why
it can be a very smart move to start
life with a Jewish momma: There is one
dangerous idea that still trumps them
all: the notion that, as Steven Pinker
describes it, "groups of people
may differ genetically in their average
talents and temperaments". For "groups
of people", read "races." |
The
Earth can cope with global warming, schools
should be banned and we should learn
to love bacteria. These are among the
dangerous ideas revealed by a poll of
leading thinkers. |
Science
can be a risky game, as Galileo learned
to his cost. Now John Brockman asks over
a hundred thinkers, "What is your
most dangerous idea?" |
"Our
brains are constantly subjected to the
demands of multi-tasking and a seemingly
endless cacophony of information from
diverse sources. " |
Very
complex systems — whether organisms,
brains, the biosphere, or the universe
itself — were not constructed by
design; all have evolved. There is a
new set of metaphors to describe ourselves,
our minds, the universe, and all of the
things we know in it. |
John
Brockman Blogs Edge's Annual
Question on Huff Po |
What We
Believe but Cannot Prove: Today's
Leading Thinkers on Science in the Age of Certainty
Edited
by John
Brockman
Introduction
by
Ian
McEwan |
|
| The
natural gift of consciousness should be treasured
all the more for its transience. |
|
The
answers...exert an un- questionable morbid
fascination — those are the very ideas
that scientists cannot confess in their technical
papers. |
|
"Fate
largo alle «beautiful minds» di
Roberto Casati;;
"La
terza cultura di John Brockman" di
Armando Massarenti |
|
God
(or Not), Physics and, of Course, Love: Scientists
Take a Leap: Fourteen scientists ponder everything
from string theory to true love. |
|
| Space
Without Time, Time Without Rest: John Brockman's
Question for the Republic of Wisdom — It
can be more thrilling to start the New Year
with a good question than with a good intention.
That's what John Brockman is doing for the
eight time in a row. |
|
| What
do you believe to be true, even though you
can't prove it? John Brockman asked over a
hundred scientists and intellectuals... more» ...
Edge |
|
That's
what online magazine The Edge — the
World Question Center asked over 120 scientists,
futurists, and other interesting minds. Their
answers are sometimes short and to the point |
|
| Science's
Scourge of Believers Declares His Faith
in Darwin... |
|
| Singolare
inchiesta in usa di un sito internet. Ha chiesto
ai signori della ricerca di svelare i loro "atti
di fede". Sono arrivate le risposte piu'
imprevedibili i fantasmi dello scienziato:
non ho prove ma ci credo. |
|
| To
celebrate the new year, online magazine Edge asked
some leading thinkers a simple question:
What do you believe but cannot prove? Here
is a selection of their responses... |
|
| Scientists
dream too — imagine that |
|
"Fantastically
stimulating ...Once
you start, you can't stop thinking about that
question. It's like the crack cocaine of the
thinking world." — BBC Radio 4 |
|
| Scientists,
increasingly, have become our public intellectuals,
to whom we look for explanations and solutions.
These may be partial and imperfect, but they
are more satisfactory than the alternatives. |
|
Bangladesh — The
cynic and the optimist, the agnostic and
the believer, the rationalist and the obscurantist,
the scientist and the speculative philosopher,
the realist and the idealist-all converge
on a critical point in their thought process
where reasoning loses its power. |
|
Il
Sole 24 Ore-Domenica Segnalate le vostre
cuioosita, chiederemo riposta alle persone
piu autorevoli |
|
| "So
now, into the breach comes John Brockman, the literary
agent and gadfly, whose online scientific salon,
Edge.org, has become one of the most interesting
stopping places on the Web. He begins every year
by posing a question to his distinguished roster
of authors and invited guests. Last year he asked
what sort of counsel each would offer George W.
Bush as the nation's top science adviser. This
time the question is "What's your law?" |
|
| "John
Brockman, a New York literary agent, writer and
impresario of the online salon Edge, figures it
is time for more scientists to get in on the whole
naming thing...As a New Year's exercise, he asked
scores of leading thinkers in the natural and social
sciences for "some bit of wisdom, some rule
of nature, some law-like pattern, either grand
or small, that you've noticed in the universe that
might as well be named after you." |
|
| "John
Brockman has posted an intriguing question on his
Edge website. Brockman advises his would-be legislators
to stick to the scientific disciplines." |
|
| "Everything
answers to the rule of law. Nature. Science. Society.
All of it obeys a set of codes...It's the thinker's
challenge to put words to these unwritten rules.
Do so, and he or she may go down in history. Like
a Newton or, more recently, a Gordon Moore, who
in 1965 coined the most cited theory of the technological
age, an observation on how computers grow exponentially
cheaper and more powerful... Recently, John Brockman
went looking for more laws." |
|
|
| "In
2002, he [Brockman] asked respondents to imagine
that they had been nominated as White House science
adviser and that President Bush had sought their
answer to 'What are the pressing scientific issues
for the nation and the world, and what is your
advice on how I can begin to deal with them?'Here
are excerpts of some of the responses. " |
|
| "Edge's
combination of political
engagement and blue-sky thinking
makes stimulating reading
for anyone seeking a glimpse
into the next decade." |
|
"Dear
W: Scientists Offer
President Advice on Policy" |
|
"There
are
84
responses,
ranging
in
topic
from
advanced
nanotechnology
to
the
psychology
of
foreign
cultures,
and
lots
of
ideas
regarding
science,
technology,
politics,
and
education." |
|
| "Brockman's
thinkers of the 'Third Culture,'
whether they, like Dawkins,
study evolutionary biology
at Oxford or, like Alan Alda,
portray scientists on Broadway,
know no taboos. Everything
is permitted, and nothing
is excluded from this intellectual
game." |
|
"The
responses are generally
written in an engaging,
casual style (perhaps encouraged
by the medium of e-mail),
and are often fascinating
and thought — provoking....
These are all wonderful,
intelligent questions..." |
 |
| "We
are interested in ‘thinking smart,'" declares
Brockman on the site, "we are not interested
in the anesthesiology of ‘wisdom.'" |
|
"INSPIRED
ARENA: Edge has been bringing together the world's
foremost scientific thinkers since 1998, and
the response to September 11 was measured and
uplifting." |
|
| "Responses
to this year's question are deliciously creative...
the variety astonishes. Edge continues
to launch intellectual skyrockets of stunning
brilliance. Nobody in the world is doing what Edge is
doing." |
|
"Once
a year, John Brockman of New York, a writer
and literary agent who represents many scientists,
poses a question in his online journal, The
Edge, and invites the thousand or so people
on his mailing list to answer it." |
 |
"Don't
assume for a second that Ted Koppel, Charlie
Rose and the editorial high command at the New
York Times have a handle on all the pressing
issues of the day.... a lengthy list of profound,
esoteric and outright entertaining responses. |
The
Greatest Inventions of the Past 2,000 Years
Edited
by John
Brockman
|
|
| "A terrific, thought provoking site." |
|
| "The
Power of Big Ideas" |
|
| "The
Nominees for Best Invention Of the Last Two Millennia
Are . . ." |
 |
"...Thoughtful and often surprising answers
....a fascinating survey of intellectual and
creative wonders of the world ..... Reading
them reminds me of how wondrous our world is." — Bill Gates, New York Times Syndicated
Column |
 "Open-minded,
free-ranging, intellectually playful
...an unadorned pleasure in curiosity,
a collective expression of wonder
at the living and inanimate world
... an ongoing and thrilling colloquium." — Ian
McEwan, Author of Saturday
|
 |
"Astounding
reading." |
|
"An
unprecedented roster of brilliant minds,
the sum of which is nothing short of
visionary |
 |
"Fantastically
stimulating...It's like the crack cocaine
of the thinking world.... Once you
start, you can't stop thinking about
that question." |
|
"One of the most interesting
stopping places on the Web" |
|
"Brilliant! Stimulating reading." |
|
"Today's visions of science
tomorrow." |
|
"Fascinating and thought-provoking
...wonderful, intelligent." |
|
"Edge.org...a Web site devoted
to dis- cussions of cutting edge science." |
|
"Awesome indie newsletter with
brilliant contribu-tors." |
|
"Everything is permitted, and
nothing is excluded from this intellectual
game." |
|
"Websites of the year...Inspired
Arena...the world's foremost scientific
thinkers." |
|
"High concept all the way...the
brightest scientists and thinkers ...
heady ... deep and refreshing." |
|
" Deliciously crea-tive...the variety
astonishes...intel-lectual skyrockets of
stunning brill-iance. Nobody in the
world is doing what Edge is
doing." |
|
"A marvellous showcase for
the Internet, it comes very highly
recom-mended." |
|
"Profound, esoteric and outright
enter-taining." |
|
"A terrific, thought provoking
site." |
|
"...Thoughtful and often surprising
...reminds me of how wondrous our world
is." — Bill Gates |
|
"One of the Net's most prestigious,
invitation-only free trade zones for
the exchange of potent ideas." |
|
"A-list: Dorothy Parker's Vicious
Circle without the food and alcohol
... a brilliant format." |
|
"Big, deep and ambitous questions...
breathtaking in scope." |
|
"Has raised electronic discourse
on the Web to a whole new level." |
|
"Lively, sometimes obscure
and almost always ambitious." |
|
|
The Edge Annual
Question — 2008
When
thinking changes your mind, that's philosophy.
When God changes your mind, that's faith.
When facts change your mind, that's science.
WHAT
HAVE YOU CHANGED YOUR MIND ABOUT? WHY?
Science
is based on evidence. What happens when the data change?
How have scientific findings or arguments changed your mind?"
165
contributors; 112,600 words |
"The
world's finest minds have responded with some of the most insightful,
humbling, fascinating confessions and anecdotes, an intellectual treasure
trove. ... Best three or four hours of intense, enlightening reading you can do for the new year. Read it now." — Mark
Morford,
San Francisco Chronicle
"As
in the past, these world-class thinkers have
responded to
impossibly open-ended questions with erudition,
imagination and clarity." — J. Peder Zane, The News & Observer
"A
jolt of fresh thinking...The answers address a fabulous array of
issues. This is the intellectual equivalent of a New Year's dip
in the lake — bracing, possibly shriek-inducing, and bound
to wake you up."
— Margaret
Wente, The
Globe and Mail
"Answers
ring like scientific odes to uncertainty, humility and doubt; passionate
pleas for critical thought in a world threatened by blind convictions." — Sandro
Contenta, The Toronto Star
"For
an exceptionally high quotient of interesting ideas to words, this
is hard to beat. ...What a feast of egg-head opinionating!" — John
Derbyshire, National Review Online
"Even
the world’s best brains have to admit to being wrong sometimes:
here, leading scientists respond to a new year challenge." — Lewis
Smith, The Times
"Provocative
ideas put forward today by leading figures." — Roger
Highfield, The Telegraph
"The
splendidly enlightened Edge website (www.edge.org) has rounded off
each year of inter-disciplinary debate by asking its heavy-hitting
contributors to answer one question. I strongly recommend a visit."— Boyd
Tonkin, The Independent
"A
remarkable feast of the intellect... an amazing group of reflections
on science, culture, and the evolution of ideas. Reading the Edge
question is like being invited to dinner with some of the most
interesting people on the planet." — Tim
O'Reilly, O'Reilly Radar
"A
great event in the Anglo-Saxon culture." — El
Mundo
"As
fascinating and weighty as one would imagine." — Comment
(Leading Article), The Independent
"They
are the intellectual elite, the brains the rest of us rely on to
make sense of the universe and answer the big questions. But in
a refreshing show of new year humility, the world's best thinkers
have admitted that from time to time even they are forced to change
their minds." — James
Randerson, The Guardian
PRESS
COVERAGE: Arts & Letters Daily; bloggingheads.tv; boingboing; Canberra
Times; Corriere Della Sera;
The Globe and Mail; The Guardian; Il Giornale; Infectious Greed;
The Independent; El Mundo; National Review Online; The News & Observer;
[email protected]; O'Reilly Radar; San
Francisco Chronicle; Slashdot;
Spiegel Online; Süddeutsche Zeitung; Sunday Tribune; The
Telegraph; The
Times; Toronto Star; The Wall Street Journal; The Washington
Post; Die Zeit
|
| [166
contributors; 113,000 words; most recent
first:] Daniel
Kahneman, Nassim
Nicholas Taleb, W. Daniel Hillis, David
Goodhart, Mark
Henderson, Ray Kurzweil, Lewis
Wolpert, David
Gelernter, Bart Kosko, Randolph
M. Nesse, Linda S. Gottfredson, Kai
Krause, Clay Shirky, Denis
Dutton, Jamshed Bharucha, Lera
Boroditsky, Gregory Benford, Richard
Dawkins, Roger Bingham, Jesse
Bering, Barry Smith, Steve
Connor, Geoffrey Miller, George
Johnson, Stephon Alexander, Beatrice
Golomb, Chris DiBona, Jordan
Pollack, Alison Gopnik, Paul
Saffo, Neil
Gershenfeld, J.
Craig Venter, David
Sloan Wilson, Simon
Baron-Cohen, Austin
Dacey, Daniel
Engber, Roger
Highfield, Francesco
De Pretis, Dimitar
Sasselov, Jaron
Lanier, Janna
Levin, Martin
Rees, Esther
Dyson, Anton
Zeilinger, Gerd
Gigerenzer, PZ
Myers, Susan
Blackmore, Adam
Bly, Nicholas
Humphrey, Paul
Ewald, Seirian
Sumner, Brian
Eno, Hans
Ulrich Obrist, Robert
Shapiro, Sam
Harris, Yossi
Vardi, David
Buss, Andrian
Kreye, Daniel
Goleman, James
Geary, Tim
O'Reilly, Philip
Campbell, Frank
Wilczek, Chris
Anderson, Rupert
Sheldrake Nicholas
A.
Christakis, Daniel
C. Dennett, Helena
Cronin, Aubrey
de
Grey, Nicholas
Carr, Lisa
Randall, Brian
Goodwin, Carolyn
Porco, William
H.
Calvin, Mary
Catherine
Bateson, Stanislas
Dehaene, Linda
Stone, Sean
Carroll, Richard
Wrangham, Marco
Iacoboni, Scott
Atran, Leo
Chalupa, John
Allen
Paulos, Eduardo
Punset, Rebecca
Goldstein, Juan
Enriquez, George
Dyson, Paul
Davies, Steven
Pinker, Alan
Alda, Patrick
Bateson, Jon
Haidt, George
Church, Terrence
Sejnowski, Judith
Rich
Harris, Oliver
Morton, Stewart
Brand, Daniel
Gilbert, Sherry
Turkle, John
Horgan, Roger
Schank, Carlo
Rovelli, Xeni
Jardin, Stephen
Schneider, Diane
Halpern, Alan
Kay, Marti
Hearst, Kevin
Kelly, Marcel
Kinsbourne, Peter
Schwartz, Scott
Sampson, Ernst
Pöppel, John
McCarthy, Seth
Lloyd, Gary
Klein, Stephen
Kosslyn,Lawrence
Krauss,Jeffrey
Epstein, Ken
Ford, John
Baez, A.
Garrett
Lisi, Lee
Smolin, Gary
Marcus, Lee
Silver, Laurence
Smith, Robert
Trivers, Rodney
Brooks, Paul
Steinhardt, Helen
Fisher, Steve
Nadis, Tor
Nørretranders, Robert
Sapolsky, Max
Tegmark, David
Dalrymple, Daniel
Everett, David
Myers, Keith
Devlin, Todd
Feinberg, Robert
Provine, Marc
D.
Hauser, Thomas
Metzinger, Dan
Sperber, Leon
Lederman, Timothy
Taylor, Haim
Harari, David
Bodanis, Charles
Seife, Mark
Pagel, Arnold
Trehub, Gino
Segre, Nick
Bostrom, Rudy
Rucker, David
Brin, Ed
Regis, Freeman
Dyson, Marcelo
Gleiser, Irene
Pepperberg, Colin
Tudge, James
O'Donnell, Michael
Shermer, Donald
Hoffman, Howard
Gardner, Piet
Hut, Douglas
Rushkoff, Karl
Sabbagh, Joseph
LeDoux, Martin
Seligman |
boingboing
January 10, 2008
EDGE Question 2008: What have you changed your mind about?
POSTED BY XENI JARDIN, JANUARY 10, 2008 9:44 AM | PERMALINK
I've been traveling in Central America for the past few weeks, so I'm late on blogging a number of things -- including this. Each year, EDGE.org's John Brockman asks a new question, and a bunch of tech/sci/internet folks reply. This year's question: What have you changed your mind about?
 Science is based on evidence. What happens when the data change? How have scientific findings or arguments changed your mind?
Link.
I was one of the 165 participants, and wrote about what I learned from Boing Boing's community experiments, under the guidance of our community manager Teresa Nielsen Hayden: Link to "Online Communities Rot Without Daily Tending By Human Hands."
Here's a partial link-list of my favorite contributions from others:
Tor Nørretranders, W. Daniel Hillis, Ray Kurzweil, David
Gelernter, Kai
Krause, Clay Shirky, J.
Craig Venter, Simon
Baron-Cohen, Jaron
Lanier, Martin
Rees, Esther
Dyson, Brian
Eno, Yossi
Vardi, Tim
O'Reilly, Chris
Anderson, Rupert
Sheldrake, Daniel
C. Dennett, Aubrey
de
Grey, Nicholas
Carr, Linda
Stone, George
Dyson,Steven
Pinker, Alan
Alda, Stewart
Brand, Sherry
Turkle, Rudy
Rucker, Freeman
Dyson, Douglas
Rushkoff .
... |
SAN FRANCISCO CHRONICLE
January 9, 2008
A
top 10 of the top 10
Mark
Morford
Honorable
mention (links.sfgate.com/ZBZY): It's not
a top 10 list. It's not even a top 100. It has nothing to
do with fashion or trends or politics or the year's coolest
iPod accessories. It is intellectual hotbed Edge.org's
annual question, this time a profound doozy: "What have
you changed your mind about. Why?"
As of now, 165 of the world's finest minds have responded with
some of the most insightful, humbling, fascinating confessions
and anecdotes, an intellectual treasure trove of proof that
flip-flopping is a very good thing indeed, especially when
informed/inspired by facts and shot through with personal experience
and laced with mystery and even a little divine insight. Best
three or four hours of intense, enlightening reading you can
do for the new year. Read it now.
Then flip it over and answer the same question for yourself.
...
|
NEWS
@ORF.at
January 9, 2008
Wenn
Wissenschaftler ihre Meinung ändern Lukas
Wieselberg, science.ORF.at
"Flip-Flops" werden
im Englischen verächtlich Menschen genannt, die plötzlich
ihre Meinung
ändern. Was bei Politikern oft als ein Zeichen von Opportunismus
interpretiert wird, gehört in der Wissenschaft zum Wesen.
Dennoch ist es auch unter Forschern und Forscherinnen nicht üblich,
sich öffentlich zu einem Sinneswandel zu bekennen. Genau
das haben sie aber nun gemacht. Bereits zum elften Mal hat
der New Yorker Literaturagent John Brockman namhaften Wissenschaftlern
zum Jahreswechsel knifflige Fragen gestellt. Diesmal lauten
sie "Wobei haben Sie Ihre Meinung geändert? Und warum?"
Die
Antworten von insgesamt 165 Forschern und Expertinnen sind
unterschiedlich und oft amüsant: Der Biologe Richard
Dawkins erklärt, warum Meinungswandel kein evolutionärer
Nachteil sind; die Philosophin Helena Cronin zeigt, dass
es unter Männer zwar mehr Nobelpreisträger gibt,
aber auch mehr Trottel; und Anton Zeilinger erzählt
von seinem Irrtum, die Quantenphysik einst für "nutzlos" gehalten
zu haben. ...
... |
THE GLOBE AND MAIL
January 9, 2008
RECOMMENDED LINKS
IT doublethink
Shane Schick
Even IT gurus have the right to think twice.
This year the online salon Edge.org has drawn a lot of attention for the annual question it put out to a mixture of scientists and artists: What have you changed your mind about?
Contributors range from actor Alan Alda to folk singer Joan Baez, but some of the real gems came from technology visionaries who decided to take a second look at their original visions.
[Note to Globe and Mail: It's "the mathematician physicist John C. Baez", not his cousin the "folk singer Joan Baez", daughter of the physicist Albert Baez.]
... |
TEMPOS DEL MUNDO (Buenos Aires)
January 8, 2008
The most prestigious scientists also change their minds
BUENOS AIRES, jan. 8 (UPI) — On the occasion of the new year, the most sublime thinkers
of the world have recognized that, from time to time, they are
obliged to rectify their views.
When addressing topics as diverse as evolution
man, the laws of physics and differences
sex, a group of scientists and philosophers, among
Which includes Steven Pinker, Daniel Dennett, Paul
Davies and Richard Wrangham, have confessed, all of them
Without exception, they have changed their minds, reports
Madrimasd.org.
This exhibition of scientific modesty has occurred
As a result of the questions, coinciding with
New year, annually raised the website edge.org,
which has obtained responses from more than 120 of the most
Important thinkers in the world.
A recurring theme in the answers is that what distinguishes science from other forms of knowledge and faith is that new ideas based on quickly replace old ones when they are based on evidence produced by tests. Accordingly, in the intellectual scope there is nothing of shameful in recognizing that one has changed positions.
[Spanish Original ...] |
SÜDDEUTSCHE ZEITUNG — Munich
January
8, 2008
FEUILLETON — Page 1
Die Partei der Zweifler;
Bei der Frage des Jahres im Onlinemagazin Edge machen
sich Wissenschaftler Gedanken Ÿber ihre eigene Fehlbarkeit
Ralf Bönt
Eines der anregendsten intellektuellen Spiele findet
sich jedes Jahr im Januar auf der Website Edge.org, wenn Wissenschaftler und Künstler im "World Question Center" auf die Frage des Jahres antworten. 2007 prügelte man mit Vehemenz auf die Religionen ein, und so klingt schon
die Frage für 2008 wie ein erneuter Generalangriff auf
die Seligen: "Welche Ihrer Meinungen haben Sie einmal
geändert?" Ist die Religion doch der Ort der göttlichen
Wahrheit, die sich nicht begründen muss und nicht
bezweifelt werden kann. Wenn er einer Partei angehöre,
hatte der Agnostiker Camus auch gesagt, dann der des
Zweifels. Keine Konfrontation sollte mehr gescheut
werden. Die letzte Heimat der Unverzweifelten bleibt
dagegen der Glaube. Was Edge angeht, wird diese
Erwartung jedoch enttäuscht. ...
|
IL GIORNALE (Milan)
January
6, 2008
Turnaround for Scientists
Matteo Sacchi
What is the coolest online forum, one where scientists and great minds from all over the world exchange opinions and ideas, and the one that keeps the scientific debate alive? Almost certainly it’s edge.org, an American website whose most ardent supporters include, to quote some of the best known, Richard Dawkins, the famous and controversial evolutionary biologist and author of The Selfish Gene; Brian Eno, the visionary music producer; psychologist Steven Pinker; and physicists like Alan Guth or Gino Segré, who are changing the present vision of the universe. This where you’ll run into debates that count, thanks also to a device that has started a cultural trend: every year edge.org asks an artful question that the big brains who haunt its electronic pages are invited to answer. This year’s question is: What have you changed your mind about? Why?
The mea culpa flocked in in great numbers and from prestigious sources, (more than a hundred in a few days), revealing that the greatest minds are changing their opinions on a lot of subjects, from the expansion of the universe to evolution, from the meaning of science to the workings of the human brain through the value of the Roman Empire in front of the barbarians.
... |
THE NEWS & OBSERVER —
Raleigh-Durham
January
6, 2008
Zane:
The changing of the mind
By J. Peder Zane, Staff Writer
... As in the past, these world-class thinkers
have responded to Web site editor John Brockman's
impossibly open-ended questions with erudition,
imagination and clarity.
In explaining why they have cast aside old
assumptions, the respondents' short essays
tackle an array of subjects, including the
nature of consciousness, the existence of
the soul, the course of evolution and whether
reason will ultimately triumph over superstition.
Two of the most interesting answers may
signal a cease-fire in the gender wars.
In
2005, Harvard President Lawrence *. Summers
was assailed for suggesting that innate differences
might explain why there are few top women
scientists. Now Diane
F. Halpern, a psychology
professor at Claremont Mc-Kenna College and
a self-described "feminist," says
Summers was onto something.
"There are real, and in some cases
sizable, sex differences with respect to
cognitive abilities," she writes.
Her views are echoed by Helena
Cronin, a
philosopher at the London School of Economics.
"Females," she
writes, "are
much of a muchness, clustering around the
mean." With men, "the variance
— the difference between the most and the
least, the best and the worst — can be vast." Translation:
There may be fewer female geniuses in certain
fields, but there are also fewer female morons...
... |
BLOGGINGHEADS TV
January
5, 2008
Science
Saturday: New Beliefs for a New Year
•
Edge.org’s annual question
• George’s answer to the Edge question
• John’s answer to the Edge question
John
Horgan & George
Johnson
John
and George’s New Year resolutions; John softens his
pessimism about neuroscience ; The soccer club theory of
terrorism; The trouble with relying on experts; How George
got hooked on garage-band science; Happiness is a burning
bridge.
... |
THE GLOBE AND MAIL
January
5, 2008
OPINIONS
Hark!
A shriek-inducing wake-up call; Culture can change
our genes. Men really do outperform women. We can't
predict the future ...
Margaret
Wente Comment
Column; Second Thoughts
If
you want to start your year with a jolt of fresh thinking,
I have just the thing. Each year around this time, a Web-based
outfit called the Edge Foundation asks a
few dozen of the world's brightest scientific brains one
big question. This year's question: What have you changed
your mind about?
The
answers address a fabulous array of issues, including the
existence of God, the evolution of mankind, climate change
and the nature of the universe. Some of the most provocative
responses deal with the bonanza of new evidence from the
fast-evolving fields of genetics, neuroscience and evolutionary
biology. This is the intellectual equivalent of a New Year's
dip in the lake - bracing, possibly shriek-inducing, and
bound to wake you up. For the full menu, go to www.edge.org.
Meantime, here's a taste. ...
... |
THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
January
5, 2008
The
Informed Reader
CULTURE
Change of Mind Could Spur A Hardening of the Heart
• EDGE --
JAN. 4
When
scientists and other prominent intellectuals change their
mind about important things, their new outlook often is
gloomier.
That,
at least, is the theme of responses to a survey conducted
by online science-and-culture publication the Edge, which
asked some influential thinkers: "What have you changed
your mind about? Why?" ... d
...Fittingly,
Harvard University psychologist Daniel
Gilbert says he has changed his mind about the benefits
of changing one's mind. In 2002, a study showed him that
people are more satisfied with irrevocable decisions than
with ones they can reverse. Acting on the data, he proposed
to his now-wife. "It turned out that the data were right:
I love my wife more than I loved my girlfriend."
... |
TORONTO
STAR
January 5, 2008
CHANGING
YOUR MIND
In
praise of the flip
Ralph Waldo Emerson
called consistency the hobgoblin of little minds, yet we live
in a world where 'flip-floppers' are treated with contempt.
An ambitious new survey of top thinkers, however, serves as
a reminder of how healthy it is to change one's mind
Sandro
Contenta
Staff Reporter
...Challenging
this complacency is a project by the Edge Foundation,
a group promoting discussion and inquiry into issues of our
time. To kick off the New Year, the group put this statement
and question to many of the world's leading scientists and
thinkers:
"When
thinking changes your mind, that's philosophy. When God changes
your mind, that's faith. When facts change your mind, that's
science. What have you changed your mind about?"
Answers,
posted on the website www.edge.org, came
from 164 people, many of them physicists, philosophers, psychologists
and anthropologists. They ring like scientific odes to uncertainty,
humility and doubt; passionate pleas for critical thought
in a world threatened by blind convictions. In short, they're
calls for more people who can change their minds. ...
... |
WASHINGTON
POST
January 4, 2008
RAW
FISHER
Marc Fisher
RFQ:
What Have You Changed Your Mind About? (Plus: Last Chance
on the Coin Contest)
...University
of Virginia psychologist Jonathan
Haidt says he used to consider sports and fraternities
to be the height of American celebration of stupidity. "Primitive
tribalism, I thought. Initiation rites, alcohol, sports, sexism,
and baseball caps turn decent boys into knuckleheads. I'd have
gladly voted to ban fraternities, ROTC, and most sports teams
from my university." But Haidt has changed his mind: "I
had too individualistic a view of human nature. I began to
see us not just as chimpanzees with symbolic lives but also
as bees without hives. When we made the transition over the
last 200 years from tight communities (Gemeinschaft) to free
and mobile societies (Gesellschaft), we escaped from bonds
that were sometimes oppressive, yes, but into a world so free
that it left many of us gasping for connection, purpose, and
meaning. I began to think about the many ways that people,
particularly young people, have found to combat this isolation.
Rave parties and the Burning Man festival are spectacular examples
of new ways to satisfy the ancient longing for communitas.
But suddenly sports teams, fraternities, and even the military
made a lot more sense."
...
...
|
INFECTIOUS
GREED
January 1, 2008
What
Have You Changed Your Mind About?
by
Paul Kedrosky
This
year's Big Question at Edge from John Brockman,
et al., is this, What have you changed your mind about? This
is, at least, an interesting question, so I'll start by saying
that what I've changed my mind about is whether, in general,
the Edge's annual question is worth reading. Okay, sometimes
it is.
That
said, are any specific answers to this year's Big Question
worth reading? Somewhat surprisingly, yes. Granted, some of
the answers are just wankery, scientists and others saying
that they used to think we wouldn't solve Problem X, and now
they think we will, someday, etc. Or, worse yet, there is a
passel of up-with-the-environment puffery, where the previously
unconverted become carbon holy-rollers. ...
Here
are a couple worth reading. Feel free to add more.
Economist Dan
Kahneman on the aspiration treadmill
Clay Shirky on
science and religion
Nassim Taleb on
.... nothing (okay, incomplete, but I still like the semiotic
pun)...
...
|
NATIONAL REVIEW ONLINE
January 3, 2008
the corner
Plato Had a Bad Year [John Derbyshire]
For an exceptionally high quotient of interesting ideas to words, this is hard to beat. ... What a feast of egg-head opinionating!
If there's a common tendency running through many of these pieces, it is the fast-rising waters of naturalism, released by a half-century of discoveries in genetics, evolutionary biology, and neuroscience, submerging every other way of looking at the human world.
We are part of nature, a twig on the tree of life. If we are to have any understanding of ourselves, we must start from that. Final answers to ancient questions are beginning to come in. You may not be happy about the answers; but not being happy about them will be like not being happy about Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle.
... |
DIE
ZEIT
January 2, 2008
Small
issue, big answers
Even the best minds
of this world sometimes have to accept
that they were wrong. Scientists to answer
the question of Edge Foundation, which
they change their mind — and why.
The
responses of the intellectuals are personal, sometimes
very technical, but also political. They cover
a wide range of what people employed: Climate change,
the difference between men and women, but also
the question of the existence of God.
... |
Correre
Della Sera — Italy
January 2, 2008
UN'ASSOCIAZIONE CULTURALE HA CHIESTO A LUMINARI
E
FILOSOFI DI RACCONTARE I PROPRI ERRORI
Quando lo scienza confessa: ho sbagliato
Dalle teorie sull'evoluzione alle differenze tra
razze,
in rete i mea culpa degli studiosi
LONDRA — «Quando
pensare modifica la tua opinione è filosofia,
quando Dio ti fa cambiare idea è fede.
Quando i fatti ti fanno vedere le cose in modo
diverso è scienza». Questa l'introduzione
al quesito per l'anno posto da un'associazione
culturale cui aderiscono i principali pensatori
del momento, da Richard Dawkins, lo zoologo britannico
autore del libro culto Il gene egoista e più recentemente
L'illusione di Dio, allo psicologo Steven Pinker passando per il musicista produttore Brian Eno.
Se
nel 2006 aveva domandato ai suoi iscritti quale
fosse l'idea più pericolosa e nel 2007 su
che cosa si sentissero ottimisti, per il 2008 Edge (il sito è www.edge.org) ha lanciato una
provocazione: su cosa avete cambiato idea? E perché?
L'obiettivo era spingere gli scienziati, gli scrittori
e i ricercatori che utilizzano regolarmente il
sito ad ammettere, in un certo senso, i propri
errori.
Centinaia
di loro hanno raccolto l'invito (a tanta solerzia
ha forse contribuito il fatto che le ultime edizioni
delle risposte sono state pubblicate sotto forma
di libro), rivelando una gamma di dietro front
tra il clamoroso e il simpatico.
... |
EL
MUNDO —
Spain
January 2, 2008
ZOOM:
Edge Question
At the beginning of each year is a great event
in the Anglo-Saxon culture, or rather, in the social
life of that culture...The event is called the Edge Annual
Question, bringing together much of the most interesting
Anthropologist Richard
Wrangham has introduced a subtle shift in the
explanation of the evolutionary history of man:
he once believed it to be caused by eating meat,
now he believes that the decisive factor is the
kitchen, ie, changing from raw to cooked. The response
from the musician Brian
Eno explains how he went from revolution to evolution, and how he left Maoism for Darwin.
... |
THE
TIMES
January 1, 2008
Science has second thoughts about life
Even the world’s
best brains have to admit to being wrong sometimes:
here, leading scientists respond to a new year
challenge
Lewis Smith, Science Reporter
The
new year is traditionally a time when people
tend to look back and try to work out where it
all went wrong – and how to get it right
in the future.
The
new year is traditionally a time when people
tend to look back and try to work out where it
all went wrong – and how to get it right
in the future.
This
time the Edge Foundation asked a number of leading
scientists and thinkers why they had changed
their minds on some of the pivotal issues in
their fields. The foundation, a chat forum for
intellectuals, posed the question: “When thinking changes
your mind, that’s philosophy. When God changes
your mind, that’s faith. When facts change
your mind, that’s science. What have you
changed your mind about? Why?”
The
group’s responses covered controversial
issues, including climate change, whether God or
souls exist and defining when humanity began.
This
time the Edge Foundation asked a number of leading
scientists and thinkers why they had changed
their minds on some of the pivotal issues in
their fields. The foundation, a chat forum for
intellectuals, posed the question: “When thinking changes
your mind, that’s philosophy. When God changes
your mind, that’s faith. When facts change
your mind, that’s science. What have you
changed your mind about? Why?”
The
group’s responses covered controversial
issues, including climate change, whether God or
souls exist and defining when humanity began.
... |
|
Posted by Zonk on
Tuesday January 01, @12:41PM
from the read-dawkins'-it's-awesome dept.
chrisd writes
|
GUARDIAN UNLIMITED
January 1, 2008
Change
of heart
What
did you change your mind
about in 2007? The world's
intellectual elite spread
some New Year humility.
James Randerson, science correspondent
Since
I wrote my piece on this year's show of scientific
humility for the New Year's day paper some big
names have added their thoughts to the mix.
Here's
evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins on
how being a "flip-flopper" is no bad
thing in science...
The
controversial geneticist Craig
Venter has had a change of heart about the
capacity of our planet to soak up the punishment
humanity is throwing at it...
There
are also interesting contributions from Simon
Baron-Cohen, the University of Cambridge autism
researcher who has changed his mind about equality;
psychologist Susan
Blackmore, who has gone from embracing the
paranormal to debunking it; and artist and composer Brian
Eno, who was once seduced by Maoism, but now
believes it is a "monstrosity".
What
did you change your mind about in 2007?
... |
THE INDEPENDENT
January 1, 2008
Deep
thinkers reveal that they, too, can change
their minds
Steve
Connor
Helena
Cronin, a philosopher at the London School
of Economics, turns her attention to why men appear
far more successful than women, by persistently
walking off with the top positions and prizes in
life — from being heads of state to winning
Nobels.
Dr
Cronin used to think it was down to sex differences
in innate talents, tastes and temperament. But now
she believes it has also something to do with the
fact that women cluster around a statistical average,
whereas men are more likely to be represented at
the extreme ends of the normal spectrum — both
at the top and the bottom.
Some
replies to the Edge question ponder the perennial
problem of God. Professor Patrick
Bateson of Cambridge University has changed his
mind on what to call himself after meeting a virulent
creationist. He is no longer an agnostic but an atheist.
Meanwhile the actor and writer Alan
Alda said that he has changed his mind about
God — twice.
What
have you changed your mind about? Why?
... |
O'REILLY RADAR
January 1, 2008
What Have You Changed Your Mind About?
By Tim O'Reilly
...I eventually offered some ideas and he jumped on one: my skepticism about the term "social software" after Clay Shirky's "Social Software Summit" in November 2002. As it turns out, Clay was right and I was wrong. This was a powerful meme indeed, just five years early.
Here's what I wrote for the 2008 Edge question. As I suspected, it's a meager offering at a remarkable feast of the intellect. Use it, if you must, as an entry point to an amazing group of reflections on science, culture, and the evolution of ideas. Reading the Edge question is like being invited to dinner with some of the most interesting people on the planet.
... |
THE GUARDIAN
January 1, 2008
Second
thoughts on life, the universe and everything
by world's best brains
The changes of mind that gave
philosophers and scientists
new insights
James Randerson,
science correspondent
They
are the intellectual elite, the brains the rest of
us rely on to make sense of the universe and answer
the big questions. But in a refreshing show of new
year humility, the world's best thinkers have admitted
that from time to time even they are forced to change
their minds.
When
tackling subjects as diverse as human evolution, the
laws of physics and sexual politics, scientists and
philosophers, including Steven
Pinker, Daniel
Dennett, Paul
Davies and Richard
Wrangham, all confessed yesterday to a change of
heart.
The
display of scientific modesty was brought about by
the annual new year's question posed by the website edge.org,
which drew responses from more than 120 of the world's
greatest thinkers.
... |
THE INDEPENDENT
31 December 2007
Boyd
Tonkin: This year, how about some new year's
irresolution?
Changes of mind lie at the core of almost every breakthrough
in science, art and thought
From
tomorrow morning, we can all sample the reasoning that
drives shifts in position by a selection of leading
scientists and social thinkers. Since 1998, the splendidly
enlightened Edge website (www.edge.org) has
rounded off each year of inter-disciplinary debate
by asking its heavy-hitting contributors to answer
one question. This time, the new-year challenge runs: "What
have you changed your mind about? Why?". I strongly
recommend a visit to anyone who feels browbeaten by
fans of that over-rated virtue: mere consistency.
... |
ARTS
& LETTERS DAILY
January 1 2008
Articles
of Note
What have you changed your mind about,
and why? John Brockman’s Edge put the question
to over a hundred scientists and scholars... more» |
THE INDEPENDENT
January 1 2008
COMMENT
Leading
article: Why, oh why?
It's
becoming something of a New Year ritual. For almost a
decade, the website www.edge.org has been asking a selection
of eminent thinkers and scholars to answer a single question
and publishing the results on 1 January.
In
the past it has presented such posers as "What do
you believe is true, even though you cannot prove it?" and "What
is the most important invention of the past 2,000 years?"
This
year Edge wanted to know: "What have you changed
your mind about and why?" As usual, it's a good
question. And the responses of the likes of Steven Pinker
and Helena Cronin are as fascinating and weighty as one
would imagine.
... |
THE
TELEGRAPH
December 31, 2007
Scientists
reveal what changed their minds
By Roger
Highfield, Science Editor
The
best men really do outperform the best women, drugs should
be used to enhance our mental powers, and marriages suffer
from a “four year itch”, not a seven year
one.
These
are among the provocative ideas put forward today by
leading figures who have been asked what has changed
their minds about some of the biggest issues.
The
poll of Nobel laureates, scientists, futurists and creative
thinkers is published by John Brockman, the New York-based
literary agent and publisher of The Edge website.
... |
JUST
PUBLISHED!
What
Are You Optimistic About?:
Today's Leading Thinkers on Why Things Are Good and Getting Better
Introduction
by Daniel C. Dennett
"Persuasively
upbeat." O, The Oprah Magazine "Our
greatest minds provide nutshell insights on how science will
help forge a better world ahead." Seed "Uplifting...an
enthralling book." The Mail on Sunday
What
Is Your Dangerous Idea?: Today's Leading Thinkers on the Unthinkable
Introduction
by Steven Pinker
Afterword
by Richard Dawkins
"Danger —brilliant
minds at work...A brilliant book: exhilarating, hilarious,
and chilling." The Evening Standard
(London) "A selection of the most explosive
ideas of our age." Sunday Herald "Provocative" The
Independent "Challenging notions put forward
by some of the world's sharpest minds" Sunday
Times "A titillating compilation" The
Guardian "Reads like an intriguing dinner
party conversation among great minds in science" Discover
What
We Believe but Cannot Prove:
Today's Leading Thinkers on Science in the Age of Certainty
Introduction by Ian McEwan
"An
unprecedented roster of brilliant minds, the sum of which is
nothing short of an oracle — a book ro be dog-eared and
debated." Seed "Scientific
pipedreams at their very best." The
Guardian "Makes for some astounding
reading." Boston Globe Fantastically
stimulating...It's like the crack cocaine of the thinking world....
Once you start, you can't stop thinking about that question." BBC
Radio 4 "Intellectual
and creative magnificence" The
Skeptical Inquirer
Harvard
Coop, December 24, 2007 |
|
MARTIN
SELIGMAN
Psychologist,
University of Pennsylvania, Author, Authentic
Happiness
We
Are Alone |
DOUGLAS
RUSHKOFF
Media
Analyst; Documentary Writer; Author, Get
Back in the Box: Innovation from
the Inside Out
The
Internet |
PIET
HUT
Professor
of Astrophysics, Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton
Explanations |
MICHAEL
SHERMER
Publisher
of Skeptic magazine, monthly columnist for Scientific
American; Author, Why Darwin Matters
The
Nature of Human Nature |
RUDY
RUCKER
Mathematician, Computer Scientist; CyberPunk Pioneer;
Novelist; Author, Lifebox,
the Seashell, and the Soul
Can
Robots See God?
|
NICK
BOSTROM
Philosopher, University of Oxford; Author,
Everything
|
GINO
SEGRE
Physicist,
University of Pennsylvania; Author: Faust In Copenhagen:
A Struggle for the Soul of Physics
The
Universe's Expansion
|
TIMOTHY
TAYLOR
Archaeologist,
University of Bradford; Author, The
Buried Soul
Relativism |
TODD
E. FEINBERG, M.D.
Professor
of Psychiatry and Neurology, Albert Einstein
College of Medicine; Author, Altered
Egos
Soul
Searching
|
KEITH
DEVLIN
Mathematician;
Executive Director,
Center for the
Study of Language
and Information,
Stanford; Author, The
Millennium Problems
What
is the nature of mathematics? |
DANIEL
EVERETT
Researcher of Pirahã Culture;
Chair of Languages,
Literatures, & Cultures,
Professor of Linguistics
and Anthropology, Illinois
State University
Homeopathic
Bias and Language Origins |
TOR
NØRRETRANDERS
Science
Writer; Consultant; Lecturer, Copenhagen; Author, The
Generous Man
Permanent
Reincarnation |
GARY
KLEIN
Research
Psychologist; Founder, Klein Associates; Author, The Power
of Intuition
Exchanging
Your Mind |
JOHN
MCCARTHY
Computer
Scientist; 1st Generation Artificial Intelligence
Pioneer, Stanford University
Attitudes
Trump Facts |
SCOTT
SAMPSON
Chief
Curator, Utah Museum of Natural History;
Associate Professor, University of Utah;
Host, Dinosaur Planet TV series
The
Death of the Dinosaurs |
MARCEL
KINSBOURNE, M.D.
Neurologist
& Cognitive Neuroscientist, The New School; Coauthor, Children's
Learning and Attention Problems
The
Impressionable Brain |
ROGER
C. SCHANK
Psychologist & Computer
Scientist; Engines for Education Inc.; Author, Making
Minds Less Well Educated than Our Own
AI? |
STEWART BRAND
Founder, Whole
Earth Catalog, cofounder; The Well; cofounder,
Global Business Network; Author, How Buildings
Learn
Good
Old Stuff Sucks |
OLIVER
MORTON
Chief
News and Features Editor, Nature;
Author, Mapping Mars
Human
Spaceflight |
JUDITH
RICH HARRIS
Independent
Investigator and Theoretician; Author, No
Two Alike: Human Nature and Human Individuality
Generalization |
PATRICK
BATESON
Professor
of Ethology, Cambridge University, author Design for a Life
Changing
my Mind |
JUAN
ENRIQUEZ
CEO,
Biotechonomy; Founding
Director, Harvard
Business School's
Life Sciences Project;
Author, The
Untied States of
America
The
source of long term power |
REBECCA
GOLDSTEIN
Philosopher,
Harvard University; Author, Betraying Spinoza
Falsifiability |
JOHN
ALLEN PAULOS
Professor
of Mathematics, Temple University, Philadelphia; Author, Irreligion:
A Mathematician Explains Why the Arguments ofr God Just Don't
Add Up
The
Convergence of Belief Change |
LEO
CHALUPA
Ophthalmologist
and Neurobiologist, University of California, Davis
Brain
plasticity |
RICHARD
WRANGHAM
Professor
of Biology and Anthropology, Harvard University' Coauthor
(with Dale Peterson), Demonic Males: Apes, and the Origins
Of Human Violence
The
Human Recipe |
MARY
CATHERINE BATESON
Cultural
Anthropologist; President, Institute for Intercultural
Studies; Author, Willing to Learn: Passages of
Personal Discovery
Making
and Changing Minds
|
WILLIAM
CALVIN
Professor,
The University of Washington School of Medicine; Author, A
Brain For All Seasons
Greenland
changed my mind
|
DANIEL
C. DENNETT
Philosopher;
University
Professor,
Co-Director,
Center
for Cognitive
Studies,
Tufts University;
Author, Breaking
the Spell:
Religion
as a Natural
Phenomenon
Competition
in the brain
|
PAUL EWALD
Professor
of Biology, Amherst College; Author, Evolution
of Infectious Disease
Trusting
Experts |
SUSAN
BLACKMORE
Psychologist and Skeptic; Author, Consciousness:
An Introduction
The
Paranormal |
GERD
GIGERENZER
Psychologist; Director of the Center
for Adaptive Behavior and Cognition at the Max Planck
Institute for Human Development in Berlin; Author, Gut
Feelings
The
Advent of Health Literacy |
MARTIN
REES
President,
The Royal Society; Professor of Cosmology & Astrophysics;
Master, Trinity College, University of Cambridge;
Author, Our Final Century: The 50/50 Threat
to Humanity's Survival
We Should
Take the 'Posthuman' Era Seriously |
ROGER
HIGHFIELD
Science
Editor, The Daily Telegraph; Coauthor, After
Dolly
Science
as faith |
AUSTIN
DACEY
philosopher, Center for Inquiry; author, The
Secular Conscience
What
Matters |
SIMON
BARON-COHEN
Psychologist,
Autism Research Centre, Cambridge University;
Author, The Essential Difference
Equality |
ALISON
GOPNIK
Psychologist,
UC-Berkeley; Coauthor, The Scientist In the Crib
Imagination
is Real |
GEOFFREY
MILLER
Evolutionary
Psychologist, University of New Mexico;
Author, The Mating Mind
Asking
for directions |
ROGER
BINGHAM
Cofounder
and Director, The Science Network; Neuroscience Researcher,
Center for Brain and Cognition, UCSD; Coauthor, The
Origin of Minds; Creator PBS Science Programs
Changing
My Religion |
RICHARD
DAWKINS
Evolutionary Biologist, Charles Simonyi
Professor For The Understanding Of Science, Oxford
University; Author, The
God Delusion
A
flip-flop should be no handicap |
DENIS
DUTTON
Professor
of the philosophy of art, University
of Canterbury, New Zealand,
editor of Philosophy and
Literature and Arts & Letters
Daily
The
Self-Made Species |
CLAY SHIRKY
Social & Technology
Network Topology Researcher; Adjunct Professor, NYU
Graduate School of Interactive Telecommunications
Program (ITP)
Religion
and Science
|
LEWIS
WOLPERT
Professor
of Biology, University College;
Author, Six
Impossible Things To Do Before Breakfast
On
Pattern Formation
|
RAY KURZWEIL
Inventor and Technologist; Author, The Singularity
Is Near: When Humans Transcend Biology
SETI
|
W.DANIEL HILLIS
Physicist,
Computer Scientist; Chairman, Applied Minds, Inc.; Author, The
Pattern on the Stone
Try
the Experiment Yourself
|
|
"The
Edge 2008 question (with answers) is
in. This year, the question is: 'What
did you change your mind about and why?'.
Answers are featured from scientists
as diverse as 
