“What has got me so hot under the collar this time is a passage I just ran across in the revised version of Stephen Hawking’s A Brief History of Time , called, amusingly enough, A Briefer History of Time ,” writes Father Edward Oakes in today’s “On the Square” article, The Explanatory Sprawl of Natural Selection .
The authors are trying to justify their initial assumption that “we are rational beings who are free to observe the universe as we want and to draw logical deductions from what we see,” and thus “might progress ever closer toward the laws that govern our universe.” But then a doubt seizes them:
Yet if there really were a complete unified theory, it would also presumably determine our actions—as the theory itself would determine the outcome of our search for it! And why should it determine that we come to the right conclusion from the evidence? Might it not equally well determine that we draw the wrong conclusion? Or no conclusion at all?
Oakes does not think much of “the great magic wand” by which they try to answer their own questions.
YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE
Ethics of Rhetoric in Times of War
What we say matters. And the way we say it matters. This is especially true in times…
How the State Failed Noelia Castillo
On March 26, Noelia Castillo, a twenty-five-year-old Spanish woman, was killed by her doctors at her own…
The Mind’s Profane and Sacred Loves
The teachers you have make all the difference in your life. That they happened to come into…
