On this ride, your hosts Steve and Mal hurtle from Point A to Point B while waxing philosophic about the need for mental health moments, the quantum physics of tree falls, and the merits of hugs. Strap in for … the Ride to Redacted!
To leave a comment, click here
Show notes:
For advice on how teachers might handle young students’ meltdowns, see, e.g., https://www.understood.org/en/articles/preventing-meltdowns-before-they-happen-a-classroom-guide. Here’s a fairly obvious and typical reminder from that source: “Remain calm and use a neutral tone. Make sure the student knows you’re there to support them.”
If you’re curious about how to become a contestant on Jeopardy, visit https://www.jeopardy.com/be-on-j/faqs#faq_section_886
While in college, Steve wrote a paper wherein he refuted Bishop Berkeley’s proof of the existence of God. In that paper, Steve criticized Berkeley for focussing on what could be called an unduly selective effect. To wit, Steve pointed out that by Berkeley’s reasoning, a loner could never be found to exist, because whenever someone has located a potential loner and brought them in to some Bishop-like authority to be assessed for genuine loner-ness, the potential loner would no longer be alone, they would be in the company of the person who found them — an absurd and fallacious method of analysis.
Samuel Johnson’s refutation of Berkeley was punchier. The Wikipedia article on Berkeley reports this gem:
“James Boswell, in the part of his Life of Samuel Johnson covering the year 1763, recorded Johnson’s opinion of one aspect of Berkeley’s philosophy:
“After we came out of the church, we stood talking for some time together of Bishop Berkeley’s ingenious sophistry to prove the non-existence of matter, and that every thing in the universe is merely ideal. I observed, that though we are satisfied his doctrine is untrue, it is impossible to refute it. I shall never forget the alacrity with which Johnson answered, striking his foot with mighty force against a large stone, till he rebounded from it,– ‘I refute it thus.’”
A word or two about quantum physics and the Uncertainty Principle (also a good name for a band; and so, of course it IS a band; or, actually, more than one band — there’s at least one from England, one from Delhi and one from Oregon). There is this from https://medium.com/@babunow99/stop-telling-god-what-to-do-69b9155782f7:
“At one point, after yet another debate over dinner about the role of chance in quantum theory, Einstein shook his head and repeated his refrain, “God does not play dice.” Bohr, who was not particularly religious but understood the metaphor, quipped in reply, ‘Einstein, stop telling God what to do.’
“The personal dynamic between Einstein and Bohr at Solvay [in Brussels] in 1927 holds a special place in scientific lore because it highlights something profoundly human at the heart of science. Here were two friends – yes, friends – who disagreed about the nature of reality yet engaged each other with curiosity and rigor. Their debate was not a bitter feud but a passionate quest for truth, each illuminating the other’s thinking in the process. Einstein once said, in reflection on quantum mechanics, “The theory yields much, but it hardly brings us closer to the secret of the Old One. I, at any rate, am convinced that He is not playing dice.” And Bohr, reflecting on those discussions years later, wrote that Einstein’s challenges were invaluable, forcing the clarification and improvement of the quantum framework. In truth, they pushed each other to think deeper. Science often advances in such crucibles of debate – with ideas tested by fire, strengthened by the very friction that at first seems to threaten them.”