| "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;
News@ORF.at; 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 (Genoa)
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
A Cultural Forum asks leading thinkers and philosophers to share their mistakes
When a scientist admits: I had it wrong
From theories of evolution to differences among races, some scholars' mea culpa are online
LONDON — "When thinking changes your mind, that's philosophy, when God changes your mind, that's faith, when facts change your mind, that's science". This is the introduction to the year’s question as posed by a cultural association to which belong the principal thinkers of this moment, from Richard Dawkins, British evolutionary biologist and author of cult book The Selfish Gene, to psychologist Steven Pinker, passing through music producer Brian Eno.
Hundreds responded to the challenge (perhaps in part because the answers to preceding questions were published as books) and revealed widespread reversals of opinions—sometimes dramatic, sometimes gracious.
... |
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 thinkers
of our world. ...
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
Anthropologist,
visiting professor Harvard Graduate
School of Education; Author, Full
Circles, Overlapping Lives
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
|
|
"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 
