Editing 2: What Is The Portal/lang-fr
The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then publish the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision | Your text | ||
Line 62: | Line 62: | ||
[00:09:19] Mais au lieu de ça, nous avons développé une culture dans laquelle dès qu'on propose quelque chose, on nous dit que la condition scientifique sine qua non implique une concordance entre théorie et expérimentation. Ce qui est entièrement faux. D'ailleurs, si vous relisez le superbe article de Paul Dirac paru dans la revue ''Scientific American'' au début des année 60, il y dit qu'il est plus important de posséder la beauté mathématique que la théorie physique | [00:09:19] Mais au lieu de ça, nous avons développé une culture dans laquelle dès qu'on propose quelque chose, on nous dit que la condition scientifique sine qua non implique une concordance entre théorie et expérimentation. Ce qui est entièrement faux. D'ailleurs, si vous relisez le superbe article de Paul Dirac paru dans la revue ''Scientific American'' au début des année 60, il y dit qu'il est plus important de posséder la beauté mathématique que la théorie physique | ||
[00:09:47] | [00:09:47] and that we learn to trust a theory, even when it doesn't agree with experiment, if it has a kind of intellectual coherence to it. But how often are people pointed to something like Dirac's 1963 paper? In fact, you could look to Jim Watson, who's told us that in order to make great advances, we have to be irresponsible. | ||
[00:10:09] | [00:10:09] Now, this is a very odd feature of the world. Many of our top people do not seem to play by [[Distributed Idea Suppression Complex|the rules that have been set for everyone else]]. And the question is, if we are in a situation in which we have unleashed such incredible destructive power as we did with the hydrogen bomb, and in potentially unlocking the cell, | ||
[00:10:28] | [00:10:28] why is it that we are so incredibly timid about what it is that we might do next? We have all the destructive power that we need already at our fingertips. What we don't have is the ability to escape our fate. In fact, what we need is to find The Portal, to find a way out, to find new economic vistas that will allow far | ||
[00:10:49] | [00:10:49] larger numbers of people to participate without causing an ecological disaster. If you take all the people, let's say, in India, China, and Bangladesh, what have you, who are leading lives at a far lower economic level than we are, if you were to elevate them to our current level as we have in the United States, you would be causing an ecological disaster. | ||
[00:11:10] | [00:11:10] Well, clearly we are not going to leave these people behind. We need them to be full participants in whatever beautiful future we're trying to create. And that future has to be ecologically sound because we don't have the ability to despoil the planet as we dream about universal human prosperity. So what are we going to do? | ||
[00:11:28] | [00:11:28] Well, I think that the most irresponsible thing to do is to stop dreaming, to get our dreams to be so small that we're not embarrassed to share them in public. I think what we need to do is to start dreaming much more aggressively, dream much bigger, and start dreaming in public with each other, harmoniously | ||
[00:11:48] | [00:11:48] if we can, or have our dreams fight each other, but at least start unlocking the potential of human imagination and not immediately grounding every new idea in some sort of race to see whether we can invalidate it, give it enough of a room to grow. You know, this is how we used to talk about protecting infant industries before we decided that free trade should always be the rule of the day and that we should have no barriers to protect, uh, new ideas in a nursery where they might learn to thrive before testing to see whether they can survive as adults. | ||
[00:12:23] | [00:12:23] What we're going to do in this program is effectively to declare war. War on stasis. War on group think. War on everything that has enervated our society, and we're going to do it because we have the ability now to [[Slipping the DISC|compete with the networks]] that previously grew up to distribute whatever it was that was portrayed as sense-making. | ||
[00:12:44] You can tell that there's something wrong with both CNN and Fox. If you're reading the New York times carefully, you can tell that the narrative arcs in the daily newspaper clearly have to have been thought out to cover many days in long before the facts are known. Somehow we are living in somebody else's reality. | [00:12:44] You can tell that there's something wrong with both CNN and Fox. If you're reading the New York times carefully, you can tell that the narrative arcs in the daily newspaper clearly have to have been thought out to cover many days in long before the facts are known. Somehow we are living in somebody else's reality. |