Where does discovery end... and invention begin?
All the laws of physics were already set in place in the universe. (assembled in this arrangement) All we had to do was find the precise combinations to be able to generate electricity, motion, atomic physics. Sure, contraptions, machines can be invented, but __.
Isaac Newton stated, "If I have seen farther than other men, it is because I have stood on the shoulders of giants." Modern innovators, scientists, biomedical researchers are all standing on the shoulders of giants. But which giants?
The natural laws of the universe have been set down before time immemorial.
Isn't it (the situation) that the laws of physics already dictated that it will be this way? And then just sat back, waiting for us to discover the methods that put it in optimal arrangement so that the "inventions" could work? Consider medicine and pharmacology. Sure extraction + purification methods had to be created. But didn't the laws of physics already decree that this precise medicine would have to be administered in this dosage, in this method (muscle, intrathecal, iv)?
What I am asking is, how much of this is truly invention and originality on the part of the human being? What percentage of it was honestly completely willed into existence by the person who worked with this system most? On the contrary, how much of it was, at its core and essence, merely discovery?
On a similar note, how much credit should the author or creator get? There are grammar editing software programs, there are software that supposedly "increase your creativity tenfold" like mindmapping. There are standing mixers that mix the butter and sugar or knead the bread dough; there are graphic design digital software programs. where must the line between creativity and help be drawn?
All the laws of physics were already set in place in the universe. (assembled in this arrangement) All we had to do was find the precise combinations to be able to generate electricity, motion, atomic physics. Sure, contraptions, machines can be invented, but __.
Isaac Newton stated, "If I have seen farther than other men, it is because I have stood on the shoulders of giants." Modern innovators, scientists, biomedical researchers are all standing on the shoulders of giants. But which giants?
The natural laws of the universe have been set down before time immemorial.
Isn't it (the situation) that the laws of physics already dictated that it will be this way? And then just sat back, waiting for us to discover the methods that put it in optimal arrangement so that the "inventions" could work? Consider medicine and pharmacology. Sure extraction + purification methods had to be created. But didn't the laws of physics already decree that this precise medicine would have to be administered in this dosage, in this method (muscle, intrathecal, iv)?
What I am asking is, how much of this is truly invention and originality on the part of the human being? What percentage of it was honestly completely willed into existence by the person who worked with this system most? On the contrary, how much of it was, at its core and essence, merely discovery?
On a similar note, how much credit should the author or creator get? There are grammar editing software programs, there are software that supposedly "increase your creativity tenfold" like mindmapping. There are standing mixers that mix the butter and sugar or knead the bread dough; there are graphic design digital software programs. where must the line between creativity and help be drawn?
0 Comments:
Post a Comment