Question quotes

From Motley Bytes Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Contents

Jim_Baggott

The Copernican Principle

“The Copernican Principle. The universe is not organized for our benefit and we are not uniquely privileged observers. Science strives to remove ‘us’ from the centre of the picture, making our existence a natural consequence of reality rather than the reason for it. Empirical reality is therefore something that we have learned to observe with detachment, without passion. Scientists ask fundamental questions about how reality works and seek answers in the evidence from observation and experiment, irrespective of their own personal preferences, prejudices and beliefs.”
  • Source: Baggott, Jim. Farewell to Reality: How Modern Physics Has Betrayed the Search for Scientific Truth (p. 23). Pegasus Books. New York, NY

F_Terry_Baker

Code Library

“The most important of these is a development support library which encourages the visibility and manageability of the product, as well as reduces clerical effort on the part of the programmers. The library is typically maintained and operated by a programming librarian who serves to control the programming assets and to provide the necessary services for both programmers and management. As a result of its use, the entire project is maintained in a centralized, up-to-date, visible form which makes its status immediately apparent to code-competent software managers and makes it possible for programmers to answer their questions directly without relying on others.”
  • Source: Baker, F. T. (1975). Software Management Through Improved Programming Technology. ACM ’75: Proceedings of the 1975 Annual Conference, 286–287. https://doi.org/10.1145/800181.810346

Dietrich_Bonhoeffer

Stupidity Liberation

“Yet at this very point it becomes quite clear that only an act of liberation, not instruction, can overcome stupidity. Here we must come to terms with the fact that in most cases a genuine internal liberation becomes possible only when external liberation has preceded it. Until then we must abandon all attempts to convince the stupid person. This state of affairs explains why in such circumstances our attempts to know what ‘the  people’ really think are in vain and why, under these circumstances, this question is so irrelevant for the person who is thinking and acting responsibly.”
  • Source: From the paper “An Account at the Turn of the Year 1942-1943” by Dietrich Bonhoeffer, contained within the book “Dietrich Bonhoeffer: Volume 8: Letters and Papers from Prison” edited by John W. Gruchy, et al. Published in 2009 by Fortress Press.

George_E_P_Box

All Models Wrong

“Remember that all models are wrong; the practical question is how wrong do they have to be to not be useful.”
  • Source: George E.P. Box, Co-author with Norman R. Draper, In George E.P. Box and Norman R. Draper, Empirical Model-Building and Response Surfaces (1987), 74.

Robert_N_Britcher

When to Stop Testing

“Two of the great questions in developing computer systems are (1) When do we stop testing? and (2) At any point during testing, how far along are we? The second question cannot be answered until the first one has been answered. The first question can be answered by fiat.”
  • Source: Britcher, Robert N. (1999). The Limits of Software: People, Projects, and Perspectives. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley. ISBN 0-201-43323-0. Page 61.

Fred Brooks

People Central

“The central question of how to improve the software art centers, as it always has, on people.”
  • Source: Brooks Jr., F. P. (1995). The Mythical Man-Month - Essays on Software Engineering (Anniversary Edition) | 1975/1995 (Anniv.). Boston. MA: Addison-Wesley. ISBN: 0201835959. Chapter 16, page 202.

C_West_Churchman

Assumptions

“When one is considering systems it's always wise to raise questions about the most obvious and simple assumptions.”
  • Source: C. West Churchman in the book The Systems Approach (1968), p. ix.

William_Kingdon_Clifford

Insufficient Evidence

"To sum up: it is wrong always, everywhere, and for anyone, to believe anything upon insufficient evidence. If a man, holding a belief which he was taught in childhood or persuaded of afterwards, keeps down and pushes away any doubts which arise about it in his mind, purposely avoids the reading of books and the company of men that call into question or discuss it, and regards as impious those questions which cannot easily be asked without disturbing it-- the life of that man is one long sin against mankind."

Alistair_Cockburn

People Characteristics

"People, as active devices, have success modes and failure modes. The following are the main ones that I have named and used to date:
1. People are communicating beings, doing best face-to-face, in person, with real-time question and answer.
2. People have trouble acting consistently over time.
3. People are highly variable, varying from day to day and place to place.
4. People generally want to be good citizens, are good at looking around, taking initiative, and doing 'whatever is needed' to get the project to work.
There are other characteristics that I won’t expand here:
- People need both think time and communicating opportunities...
- People work well from examples...
- People prefer to fail conservatively than to risk succeeding differently; prefer to invent than to research, can only keep a small amount in their heads, and do make mistakes, and find it hard to change their habits.
- Individual personalities easily dominate a project.
- A person’s personality profile strongly affects their ability to perform specific assignments."

Edsger_Wybe_Dijkstra

Machines Can Think

“The question of whether Machines Can Think... is about as relevant as the question of whether Submarines Can Swim.”

Peter_Drucker

Change as Order

“We no longer even understand the question whether change is by itself good or bad, ... We start out with the axiom that it is the norm. We do not see change as altering the order... We see change as being order itself - indeed the only order we can comprehend today is a dynamic, a moving, a changing one.”
  • Source: Peter F. Drucker, “Landmarks of Tomorrow: A Report on the New 'Post-Modern' World”, New York: Harper & Row, 1959. p. 22.

Arthur_Eddington

Brain and Mind

“Take the living human brain endowed with mind and thought. Thought it is one of the indisputable facts of the world. I know that I think, with a certainty which I cannot attribute to any of my physical knowledge of the world. More hypothetically, but on fairly plausible evidence, I am convinced that you have minds which think. Here then is a world fact to be investigated. The physicist brings his tools and commences systematic exploration. All that he discovers is a collection of atoms and electrons and fields of force arranged in space and time, apparently similar to those found in inorganic objects. He may trace other physical characteristics, energy, temperature, entropy. None of these is identical with thought. He might set down thought as an illusion ⎯ some perverse interpretation of the interplay of the physical entities that he has found. Or if he sees the folly of calling the most undoubted element of our experience an illusion, he will have to face the tremendous question, How can this collection of ordinary atoms be a thinking machine?”

Albert_Einstein

Questioning

“The important thing is not to stop questioning. Curiosity has its own reason for existence. One cannot help but be in awe when he contemplates the mysteries of eternity, of life, of the marvelous structure of reality. It is enough if one tries merely to comprehend a little of this mystery each day. Never lose a holy curiosity. ... Don't stop to marvel.”

  • Source: A statement made to William Miller, a Life Magazine editor, recorded in his personal memoirs. Reprinted in LIFE magazine 1955-05-02, in the article entitled “Death of a Genius: His Fourth Dimension, Time, Overtakes Einstein”, page 64. Online at <https://books.google.com/books?id=dlYEAAAAMBAJ>.

Richard_Feynman

Cargo Cult

“...there have been many experiments running rats through all kinds of mazes, and so on — with little clear result. But in 1937 a man named Young did a very interesting one. He had a long corridor with doors all along one side where the rats came in, and doors along the other side where the food was. He wanted to see if he could train rats to go to the third door down from wherever he started them off. No. The rats went immediately to the door where the food had been the time before. The question was, how did the rats know, because the corridor was so beautifully built and so uniform, that this was the same door as before? Obviously there was something about the door that was different from the other doors. So he painted the doors very carefully, arranging the textures on the faces of the doors exactly the same. Still the rats could tell. Then he thought maybe they were smelling the food, so he used chemicals to change the smell after each run. Still the rats could tell. Then he realized the rats might be able to tell by seeing the lights and the arrangement in the laboratory like any commonsense person. So he covered the corridor, and still the rats could tell. He finally found that they could tell by the way the floor sounded when they ran over it. And he could only fix that by putting his corridor in sand. So he covered one after another of all possible clues and finally was able to fool the rats so that they had to learn to go to the third door. If he relaxed any of his conditions, the rats could tell. Now, from a scientific standpoint, that is an A-number-one experiment. That is the experiment that makes rat-running experiments sensible, because it uncovers the clues that the rat is really using — not what you think it's using. And that is the experiment that tells exactly what conditions you have to use in order to be careful and control everything in an experiment with rat-running. I looked into the subsequent history of this research. The next experiment, and the one after that, never referred to Mr. Young. They never used any of his criteria of putting the corridor on sand, or of being very careful. They just went right on running rats in the same old way, and paid no attention to the great discoveries of Mr. Young, and his papers are not referred to, because he didn't discover anything about rats. In fact, he discovered all the things you have to do to discover something about rats. But not paying attention to experiments like that is a characteristic of cargo cult science.”
  • Source: "Cargo Cult Science", adapted from a 1974 Caltech commencement address; also published in Surely You're Joking, Mr. Feynman!, p. 345.
    • Feynman, R. P. (1974). In Feynman, R. P. (1974, June). Cargo Cult Science. Science and Engineering.

Henry_Ford

Wages

“There is nothing to running a business by custom – to saying: 'I pay the going rate of wages.' The same man would not so easily say: 'I have nothing better or cheaper to sell than any one has.' No manufacturer in his right mind would contend that buying only the cheapest materials is the way to make certain of manufacturing the best article. Then why do we hear so much talk about the 'liquidation of labour' and the benefits that will flow to the country from cutting wages – which means only the cutting of buying power and the curtailing of the home market? What good is industry if it be so unskillfully managed as not to return a living to everyone concerned? No question is more important than that of wages – most of the people of the country live on wages. The scale of their living – the rate of their wages – determines the prosperity of the country.”
  • Source: Henry Ford. A book. Entitled My Life and Work. Written by Henry Ford in collaboration with Samuel Crowther. Published 1922, Garden City, NY: Doubleday. Chapter VIII.

Yuval_Noah_Harari

Algorithm Interest

“Algorithms are now playing this important role of editors. But the question which interests the algorithms and of human bosses is not what is the truth but what will get user engagement.”
  • Source: Yuval Noah Harari speaking in a YouTube interview with MSNBC television news anchor Ari Melber discussion his book “Nexus”. Published 2024-09-12 on YouTube entitled “MAGA propaganda decoded: Obama’s fave historian shreds Trump tricks with groundbreaking scholarship”, channel “MSNBC”, at 26:45. Online at <https://youtu.be/toF5PIClNZ4?si=5ogXQFnsVW1yhv2R>, retrieved 2024.

Stephen_Hawking

God

“It is reasonable to ask who or what created the universe, but if the answer is God, then the question has merely been deflected to that of who created God.”
  • Source: Stephen Hawking in his book “The Grand Design”, published by Bantam in 2010). ISBN: 9780553907070.

Joseph_Heller

Educate People

“It was neither possible nor necessary to educate people who never questioned anything.”
  • Source: Heller, Joseph. 'Catch-22: 50th Anniversary Edition'. Chapter 4 'Doc Daneeka', page 36. Simon & Schuster. Kindle Edition.

Donald_Hoffman

Spacetime Deep Enough

“The question is, is spacetime itself a deep enough structure for us to try to boot up consciousness from.”
  • Source: Donald Hoffman, in the YouTube video entitled “Donald Hoffman's New Approach To Consciousness” channel “Dr Brian Keating”. Online at <https://youtu.be/mU_WBela71Y?si=fNfLLsOsUDRDC1XD> posted 2024-08, retrieved 2024-08. In video at 36:10.

Douglas_Hofstadter

Evidence

“'What is evidence?' is not just a philosophical question, for it intrudes into life in all sorts of places. You are faced with an extraordinary number of choices as to how to interpret evidence at every moment.”
  • Source: Hofstadter, Douglas R. (1979). Gödel, Escher, Bach: an Eternal Golden Braid. Written by Douglas R. Hofstadter. Basic Books, New York, NY. ISBN 13: 978-046502656-2. ISBN 10: 046502656-7. Chapter 20. Page 695.

Grace_Hopper

Information Flood

“We're flooding people with information. We need to feed it through a processor. A human must turn information into intelligence or knowledge. We've tended to forget that no computer will ever ask a new question.”
  • Source: Grace Hopper as quoted in "The Wit and Wisdom of Grace Hopper" by Philip Schieber in OCLC Newsletter, No. 167 (March/April 1987).

Millisecond

“I normally drive all of my bosses totally nuts. Because I won't do anything until I understand what I have been told to do. So, when you tell me to do something I start asking questions until I get a clear picture of what I've been told to do... so I naturally said, ‘What's a millisecond?’ Well they told me it's a thousandth of a second, and I had a problem immediately. I can see a second go by on a clock but darned if I could see a thousandth of it. So, I said, ‘Please show me a millisecond.’ And nobody but nobody would show me a millisecond. Time went on with me still fussing 'til somebody stuck a finder in one of my programs and said, ‘Hey, you wasted five microseconds’ and I said ‘So what? What's a Microsecond?’ Well, they told me it's a millionth of a second, and again I had a problem. In the first place I didn't know what a million of anything was. The biggest check I had ever seen was less than a thousand dollars. I didn't know what a million was, and if I didn't know what a million was, I didn't know what a millionth was. And I fussed and fumed because I wanted to know what a microsecond was. I got nowhere. Pretty soon over in the engineering building they started talking about circuits that act in nano seconds, billionths of a second. Well that really had me on the ropes, because in the first place I didn't know what a billion was. I don't think most of those guys up in Washington do either. And if you don't know what a billion is, how on earth do you know what a billionth is? I fussed and fumed. Finally, one morning in total desperation I called over to the engineering building and I said, ‘Please cut off a nanosecond and send it over to me.’ And I brought you some today. Now what I wanted when I asked for a nanosecond was, I wanted a piece of wire which would represent the maximum distance that electricity could travel in a billionth of a second. Of course, it wouldn't really be through wire. It would be out in space at the velocity of light. So, if you start at the velocity of light and use your friendly computer, you discover that a nanosecond is 11.8 inches long/ The maximum limiting distance that electricity can travel in a billionth of a second. Well, I was real[ly] happy with my nanosecond. I looked at it from all angles. I thought about it. I looked at wall switches and counted the distance some of those lights went on. Geez, these may have taken a couple of thousand nanoseconds. Finally at the end of about a week I called back and said, ‘Look. I need something to compare this to. Could I please have a microsecond?’ I've only got one microsecond so I can't give you each one. There's a microsecond. 984 feet. I sometimes think we ought to hang one over every programmer's desk so they'll know exactly what they're throwing away when they throw away a microsecond. I hope you all get some of these nanoseconds. I've got lots of them with me. They're absolutely marvelous for explaining to wives and children, and admirals and generals. You may find yourself in a spot where you have to explain why two pieces of equipment have to be close together, Or explain to an admiral why it takes so damn long to send a message via satellite because there are an awful lot of nanoseconds... But I said I wanted to add in 300 picoseconds. Now a picosecond is a thousandth of a nanosecond. The best way to make picoseconds is to get one of those big pepper grinders and you can make picoseconds all over the table.”
  • Source: Grace Hopper in a lecture delivered 1982-08-19 at the NSA (National Security Agency). Video available at YouTube as “NSA Releases Internal 1982 Lecture by Computing Pioneer Rear Admiral Grace Hopper”, channel The Black Vault Originals, online at <https://youtu.be/_bP14OzIJWI?si=wcUTl04b4p4scY6k>, posted 2024-08, retrieved 2024-08. Quote in video at 40:25.

Daniel_Kahneman

Intuitive Heuristics

“This is the essence of intuitive heuristics: when faced with a difficult question, we often answer an easier one instead, usually without noticing the substitution.”

Samuel_Karlin

Purpose of Models

“The purpose of models is not to fit the data but to sharpen the questions.”
  • Source: Samuel Karlin, Delivered at the Eleventh R. A. Fisher Memorial Lecture, Royal Society (20 April 1983). In Carl C. Gaither and Alma E. Cavazos-Gaither, Statistically Speaking: a Dictionary of Quotations (1996), 140.

Pierre-Simon_Laplace

Problems of Probability

“The most important questions of life... are indeed for the most part only problems of probability. Strictly speaking it may even be said that nearly all our knowledge is problematical; and in the small number of things which we are able to know with certainty, even in the mathematical sciences themselves, the principal means for ascertaining truth — induction and analogy — are based on probabilities.”

Pearl_and_Mackenzie

Strong AI

“The successes of deep learning have been truly remarkable... Nevertheless, deep learning has succeeded primarily by showing that certain questions or tasks we thought were difficult are in fact not. It has not addressed the truly difficult questions that continue to prevent us from achieving humanlike AI. As a result the public believes that ‘strong AI,’ machines that think like humans, is just around the corner or maybe even here already. In reality, nothing could be farther from the truth.”
  • Source: Judea Pearl and Dana Mackenzie in “The Book of Why: The New Science of Cause and Effect”. Published by Basic Books of New York, NY in 2018. Chapter 1, page 30. ISBN 978-0465097616 (ebook).

Alan_Perlis

Iterative Simulation Design

“1. A software system can best be designed if the testing is interlaced with the designing instead of being used after the design.
2. A simulation which matches the requirements contains the control which organizes the design of the system.
3. Through successive repetitions of this process of interlaced testing and design the model ultimately becomes the software system itself.
I think that it is the key of the approach that has been suggested, that there is no such question as testing things after the fact with simulation models, but that in effect the testing and the replacement of simulations with modules that are deeper and more detailed goes on with the simulation model controlling, as it were, the place and order in which these things are done.”

Steven_Pinker

Computational Mind Probabilistic

“The computational theory thus embraces an alternative kind of computer with many elements that are active to a degree corresponding to the probability that some statement is true or false, and in which the activity levels change smoothly to register new and roughly accurate probabilities. (As we shall see, that may be the way the brain works.) The key idea is that the answer to the question 'What makes a system smart?' is not the kind of stuff it is made of or the kind of energy flowing through it, but what the parts of the machine stand for and how the patterns of changes inside it are designed to mirror truth-preserving relationships (including probabilistic and fuzzy truths).”
  • Source: Steven Pinker (1997). How the Mind Works. New York, NY: W. W. Norton. ISBN 978-0-393-06973-0; eISBN 978-0-393-06973-0. Chapter 2 Section: The search for Intelligent Life in the Universe.

Robert_M_Pirsig

An Experiment is Never a Failure

“An experiment is never a failure solely because it fails to achieve predicted results. An experiment is a failure only when it also fails adequately to test the hypothesis in question, when the data it produces don’t prove anything one way or another.”
  • Source: Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance: An Inquiry Into Values (1974), 102.

Plato

Dreaming

“(Socrates) There's a question you must often have heard people ask - the question what evidence we could offer if we were asked whether in this present instant, at this moment, we are asleep and dreaming all our thoughts, or awake and talking to each other in real life.
(Theaetetus) Yes, Socrates, it certainly is difficult to find the proof we want here. The two states seem to correspond in all their characteristics. There is nothing to prevent us from thinking when we are asleep that we are having the very same discussion that we have just had. And when we dream that we are telling the story of a dream, there is an extraordinary likeness between the two experiences.”
  • Source: Plato, 'Theaetetus' 158bc

Nicholas_Rescher

Inherent Unpredictability

“The inherent unpredictability of future scientific developments — the fact that no secure inference can be drawn from one state of science to another — has important implications for the issue of the limits of science. It means that present-day science cannot speak for future science: it is in principle impossible to make any secure inferences from the substance of science at one time about its substance at a significantly different time. The prospect of future scientific revolutions can never be precluded. We cannot say with unblinking confidence what sorts of resources and conceptions the science of the future will or will not use. Given that it is effectively impossible to predict the details of what future science will accomplish, it is no less impossible to predict in detail what future science will not accomplish. We can never confidently put this or that range of issues outside 'the limits of science', because we cannot discern the shape and substance of future science with sufficient clarity to be able to say with any assurance what it can and cannot do. Any attempt to set 'limits' to science — any advance specification of what science can and cannot do by way of handling problems and solving questions — is destined to come to grief.”
  • Source: Nicholas Rescher, The Limits of Science (1984), 102-3.

Frank_H_T_Rhodes

Kettle Boiling

“It is not a question of choosing one and thereby rejecting the other; both are necessary in order to do justice to the totality... This is perhaps simply shown by Dr Douglas Spanner's example of the boiling kettle. Why, I may ask, is the kettle boiling? There are two kinds of answer that can be given. One is, it is boiling because energy is being supplied to it in the form of heat and the maximum vapour pressure of the water is now equal to the atmospheric pressure. The other kind of answer which may be given is that the kettle is boiling because I put it on to make a cup of tea. Now these are different answers, the first in terms of immediate causes and the second in terms of ultimate cause. But both are true, both are complementary and not competitive. One answer is appropriate within a particular frame of reference, the other within another frame of reference. There is a sense in which each is incomplete without the other.”
  • Source: Frank H. T. Rhodes in the essay “Christianity in a Mechanistic Universe”, included in the book “Christianity in a Mechanistic Universe and Other Essays” edited by Donald M. MacKay, published by Inter-Varsity Press, Chicago, Illinois, in 1965.

Bertrand_Russell

Scientific Method Complicated and Simple

“Scientific method, although in its more refined forms it may seem complicated, is in essence remarkably simply. It consists in observing such facts as will enable the observer to discover general laws governing facts of the kind in question. The two stages, first of observation, and second of inference to a law, are both essential, and each is susceptible of almost indefinite refinement.”
  • Source: Bertrand Russell (1931), In The Scientific Outlook (1931, 2009), 3.

Carl_Sagan

Science Thinking

“Science is more than a body of knowledge. It's a way of thinking. A way of skeptically interrogating the universe with a fine understanding of the human fallibility. If we are not able to ask skeptical questions to interrogate those who tell us that something is true, to be skeptical of those in authority, then we are up for grabs for the next charlatan, political or religious, who comes ambling along. It is a thing that Jefferson laid great stress on. It wasn't enough he said to enshrine some rights in a constitution or bill of rights. The people had to be educated and they have to practice their skepticism and education. Otherwise we don't run the government. The government runs us.”
  • Source: Carl Sagen speaking in an video entitled 'CARL SAGEN - A Way of Thinking' posted on YouTube at https://youtu.be/J1cNaFG1VII , at 00:01:25 in video. Retrieved 2021-02-09.

Rupert_Sheldrake

Empirical Approach

“Science needs to be liberated from these constrictive dogmas of mechanistic materialism... If we go beyond those dogmas, science gets much more interesting. All sorts of new research become possible. New questions can be asked. We can find out more about nature and more about consciousness by doing science in a new more open way. But what remains part of science so crucial to it is the empirical approach. The putting forward of hypotheses, the critical discussion, and the testing of hypotheses by experiment, the scientific method.”
  • Source: Rupert Sheldrake. The video “Nature's Hidden Intelligence: Morphic Fields”. Online at https://youtu.be/qrIlWrGe4w4?t=4894. Posted 2025-01-03. Video offset 1:21:34.

John_Steinbeck

All Information Not In

“It is not enough to say that we cannot know or judge because all the information is not in. The process of gathering knowledge does not lead to knowing. A child's world spreads only a little beyond his understanding while that of a great scientist thrusts outward immeasurably. An answer is invariably the parent of a great family of new questions. So we draw worlds and fit them like tracings against the world about us, and crumple them when we find they do not fit and draw new ones.”
  • Source: John Steinbeck, In John Steinbeck and Edward Flanders Ricketts, Sea of Cortez: a Leisurely Journal of Travel and Research (1941), 165-66.

Frederick_Winslow_Taylor

Maximum Prosperity

“It would seem to be so self-evident that maximum prosperity for the employer, coupled with maximum prosperity for the employee, ought to be the two leading objects of management, that even to state this fact should be unnecessary. And yet there is no question that, throughout the industrial world, a large part of the organization of employers, as well as employees, is for war rather than for peace, and that perhaps the majority on either side do not believe that it is possible so to arrange their mutual relations that their interests become identical.”
  • Source: F.W. Taylor, 1911. Principles of Scientific Management. New York and London, Harper & brothers. Chapter 1.

John_Tukey

Right Question

“Far better an approximate answer to the right question, which is often vague, than an exact answer to the wrong question, which can always be made precise.”
  • Source: John Tukey. The future of data analysis. Annals of Mathematical Statistics 33 (1), (1962), page 13.

Alan_Turing

Can Machines Think

“The question, ‘Can machines think?’ should be replaced by ‘Are there imaginable digital computers which would do well in the imitation game?’... The original question, ‘Can machines think?’ I believe to be too meaningless to deserve discussion.”
  • Source: From the paper entitled “Computing Machinery and Intelligence” by Alan Turing. Published in 1950 in “Mind”, volume 49, number 236.

Gerald_Weinberg

Truth and Falsehood

“It's not a question of ‘truth’ or ‘falsehood’ ... but of what questions you want answered.“
  • Source: Weinberg, Gerald (2011-06-03). Passive Regulation: General Systems Design Principles (General Systems Thinking) (Kindle Locations 1751-1752). Weinberg & Weinberg. Kindle Edition.

Keywords: Truth_quotes Falsehood_quotes Question_quotes Answer_quotes

John_Archibald_Wheeler

It From Bit

“It from bit symbolizes the idea that every item of the physical world has at bottom — at a very deep bottom, in most instances — an immaterial source and explanation; that which we call reality arises in the last analysis from the posing of yes-no questions and the registering of equipment-evoked responses; in short, that all things physical are information-theoretic in origin and that this is a participatory universe.”
  • Source: John Archibald Wheeler from a paper originally presented at the 1989 Santa Fe Institute workshop. Published in the book "Complexity, Entropy & the Physics of Information: Volume I", edited by Wojciech H. Zurek, section "Physics of information", as a paper entitled "Information, Physics, Quantum: The Search for Links". Published in 1993 by the SFI Press Archive Series. ISBN: 978-1-947864-27-6.

Alfred_North_Whitehead

Rigid Dogma Destroys Truth

“It is rigid dogma that destroys truth; and, please notice, my emphasis is not on the dogma, but on the rigidity. When men say of any question, ‘This is all there is to be known or said of the subject; investigation ends here,' that is death. It may be that the mischief comes not from the thinker but for the use made of his thinking by late-comers. Aristotle, for example, gave us our scientific technique ... yet his logical propositions, his instruction in sound reasoning which was bequeathed to Europe, are valid only within the limited framework of formal logic, and, as used in Europe, they stultified the minds of whole generations of medieval Schoolmen. Aristotle invented science, but destroyed philosophy.”
  • Source: Alfred North Whitehead, Dialogues of Alfred North Whitehead, as recorded by Lucien Price (1954, 2001), 165.

Ellis_Leon_Yochelson

Scientists Make Predictions

“Scientists are supposed to make predictions, probably to prove they are human and can be as mistaken as anyone else. Long-range predictions are better to make because the audience to whom the prediction was made is no longer around to ask questions. The alternative... is to make conflicting predictions, so that one prediction may prove right.”
  • Source: Ellis Leon Yochelson. 'Fossils—The How and Why of Collecting and Storing', Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington (1969), 82, 597.

Shoshana_Zuboff

Technology Leadership

“The questions that we face today are finally about leadership. Will there be leaders who are able to recognize the historical moment and the choices it presents? Will they find ways to create the organizational conditions in which new visions, new concepts, and a new language of workplace relations can emerge? Will they be able to create organizational innovations that can exploit the unique capacities of the new technology and thus mobilize their organization's productive potential to meet the heightened rigors of global competition? Will there be leaders who understand the crucial role that human beings from each organizational stratum can play in adding value to the production of goods and services? If not, we will be stranded in a new world with old solutions. We will suffer through the unintended consequences of change, because we have failed to understand this technology and how it differs from what came before.”
  • Source: Zuboff, S. (1988). In The Age Of The Smart Machine: The Future Of Work And Power. New York, NY: Basic Books, p. 12. ISBN:0465032125.

Natural Attitude

“The most treacherous enemy of such research is what philosophers call ‘the natural attitude,’ our capacity to live daily life in a way that takes for granted the objects and activities that surround us. Even when we encounter new objects in our environment, our tendency is to experience them in terms of categories and qualities with which we are already familiar. The natural attitude allows us to assume and predict a great many things about each other's behavior without first establishing premises at the outset of every interaction. The natural attitude can also stand in the way of awareness, for ordinary experience has to be made extraordinary in order to become accessible to reflection. This occurs when we encounter a problem: when our actions do not yield the expected results, we are caught by surprise and so are motivated to reflect upon our initial assumptions. Awareness requires a rupture with the world we take for granted; then old categories of experience are called into question and revised.”
  • Source: Zuboff, S. (1988). In The Age Of The Smart Machine: The Future Of Work And Power. New York, NY: Basic Books, p. 13. ISBN:0465032125.