SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Strategies & Market Trends : The Residential Real Estate Crash Index -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Skeeter Bug who wrote (256989)6/27/2010 8:47:04 AM
From: neolibRead Replies (1) | Respond to of 306849
 
>>morality and ethics should also not have preferred reference frames.<<

what does this mean? specifically. examples might be valuable.


Just a hunch. In cosmology, we didn't make much progress until we shifted our view from being at the center of the universe. First off, the universe revolved around the earth. Then we figured out that actually the earth spun, and revolved around the sun. But until General Relativity (and actually there are still attempts to find preferred frames IIRC) there were common views that somehow "our frame" the earth was special. While this view has been largely ditched in physics, as you head towards the "softer" sciences, the view seems to be quite a bit stronger. Look at the biological view of earth and the hunt for extra solar planets. There is still the view that Sol is unique, although plenty of scientists of course don't think so. By the time you hit philosophy/ethics, its pretty clear that preferred frames are often the starting point. Hence my hunch that these "softer" sciences are on weaker footing, until they correct this foundational issue.

For some specific examples, one I saw some images on the web this last week would be that in eastern europe the views of how to treat gypsies. While this is not a scientific view, it is a somewhat common view. Preferred frames cause such thinking.