Re: Constructive Laziness (Re: Stirling's _The Sunrise Lands_ and misc thoughts)

Aaron Denney wrote:
On 2007-10-10, Steve <joatsimeon@xxxxxxx> wrote:
On Oct 8, 12:18?pm, Mark_Reich...@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

But it isn't scientistic materialism I would rely on, it's constructive laziness.
-- ask yourself this: why did it take nearly 5000 years from the
domestication of the horse to the invention of the stirrup?

Why did nobody come up with the wheelbarrow before Song China?

Why did it take nearly 15,000 years for someone to figure out how to
make a bow that wasn't handicapped by the Archer's Paradox?

Why did nobody figure out a plow that could do more than one furrow
and which could be driven from a seat until about 9,000 years after
the invention of the plow, animal traction, and the wheel?

Low population, malnutrition, nasty parasites affecting intelligence,
and the fact that for those of higher than average intelligence, conning
the rest of your tribe as shaman is far more easy and profitable than
inventing.

I just have to chime in here... there's another issue at hand and that is the World of Mind. People in the ancient period didn't have a concept of invention as a deliberate process, but rather saw each invention as a happy accident. Incremental advances occurred, but it was more an evolutionary process than a revolutionary one.

Constructive laziness, the idea that "necessity is the mother of invention" didn't come about before the Christian era. When monasteries were centres of innovation and development, creating a steady stream of labour saving devices. Here need (labour was scarce), skill (the monks were educated and had all the skills necessary to maintain a community), and world of mind came together.

The ancient world is often stereotyped as having lots of slaves, and so no need for labour saving devices. However truth is that they *did* use labour saving devices, the Roman's did build waterwheels, and the first windmills were in Persia (chronically troubled by labour shortages).

So the real question is this: How is the World of Mind changed? S.M. Stirling says that the world of mind is altered so the scientific method is mainly lost, and the very idea of progress is gone. If that is so then you're stuck, you're down in a hole and there's no getting out!

You can argue against this view, and claim that the scientific method shouldn't be lost, and the world of mind wouldn't change that much. However if you do grant his proposition then everything else logically follows.

There is one big argument in favour of SM Stirlings idea, and it requires that you understand the foundation of science: The idea that the universe is built on immutable laws, that our senses can give us true information about the universe, and that our reason can understand the laws of nature. That we can, to borrow a phrase, read the mind of God.

The unchanging laws of nature just changed, big time, in a way that none of our scientific theories can make sense of. The various changes just don't make sense! Why is electricity not working when the magnets DO work? Why can we still think, why do our brains still work? None of this makes sense, none of this can be fully reconciled with our scientific knowledge, it contradicts everything we know.

That kicks the legs out from under science, that threatens the very foundations of science. Combine that with the death of the bulk of the theoretical scientists, wars, plagues, famines, and what have you... Then consider how expensive extensive experiments with fine machinetools would be, and that anyone who has such tools would find more immediate and useful uses for them.

You can say that people would still persevere, that they'd still succeed somewhere, and that you only have to succeed once. Though I have to say that when you consider this, it sure looks grim.

By the way I haven't actually read the books (sorry!), but what comes to my mind is this: There is one organisation that has survived massive paradigm changes, civil unrests, famines, the collapse of the civilized world, and the rise of barbarian warlord. Not only survived, but thrived, and preserved the knowledge of past ages.

I am of course talking about the Roman Catholic Church.

If there is to be any scientific development that's who I'd place my bet on, they have the mixture of knowledge, resources, and very long term planning necessary. I'm sorry to say but most secular scientists, and secular authorities, wouldn't have any of those after the event.

This all gives me a lot of neat ideas, and images pop into my head, but since I haven't read the books I'll keep them to myself for now.

---
--
- Vegard Valberg

My e-mail adress is <Vvalberg@xxxxxxxxx>,
that is two v's, not one W.
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: You say that science is not about truth, meaning, knowledge, or faith
    ... >> invention of the human mind, and people consist of matter, as do ... free to associate any stimuli with any concept. ... for the notion of red was developed in your mind. ... As to the purpose, primarily it's survival, secondarily, a more ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: racism is nice
    ... Mainstream scientists generally don't acknowledge free behaviour. ... while ignoring the invention of quantum mechanics which ... Creationism which is based on a principle of a free act of creation, ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: The free invention of ontologies we put into our theories
    ... >> invention of the mind? ... > I haven't said anything about stimuli. ... how would you claim to experience the sight of a red rose? ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: The Invention of Evolution
    ... an 'invention'...the creation of something in the mind. ... it is an invention, ... There is no 'evolution', or 'natural selection'. ... lonely neurons twitching and sparking together in the dark for adman, ...
    (talk.origins)
  • OT. Re:In the news
    ... Flowers original design was rejected by the MOD and he developed it with his ... As for the invention of radio etc, this is down to Tesla, would you believe? ... The guy who has been so reviled by scientists of all generations since. ... The transistor has a very dubious history and the picture of the original, ...
    (talk.origins)
Loading