[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Author Index

Re: Consistency vs. Correspondence



Mike,

Very interesting. I didn't know that, but it makes sense. Americans are pretty much "self generated," which is not always a compliment. It makes me think that as we talk so much about self-defining, self-organizing, self-generating systems, we need to balance that with contextual influence.

McIntyre, Mike S. wrote:
John Kineman wrote:

  
This was VERY dissatisfying to the physicists who were forced to accept
it after Einstein, and particularly dissatisfying to Einstein who spent
the remainder of his life trying to disprove it (the famous "God doesn't
play dice" quote).
    

Hi John,

I just wanted to interject a brief comment here.  This level of dis-
satisfaction on the part of ~European~ physicists seems not to have been
shared by ~American~ physicists, i.e. there seems to have been a cul-
tural subtext to this question that affected the reactions of the
physicists.  European physicists, in general, had minds well-stocked
with philosophical ideas dating back, in a relatively unbroken line, to
the ancient Greeks.  In contrast, American physicists had much less
training, or interest, in philosophy -- they thought of themselves as
pragmatists.  The result was that Americans accepted quantum theory
without so much as skipping a beat, and they frankly couldn't understand
why the Europeans were so bugged about it.  Or, at any rate, this is the
argument advanced by Nancy Cartwright in a chapter she wrote for a book
called The Probabilistic Revolution.  Cartwright, as I understand her,
favors the American point of view.  Even though I think my tendencies
lie more with the Europeans, I think her exposition of the differences
between the two points of view is very good.

Best regards,
Mike McIntyre