Science, and fundamental science especially, has been widely diagnosed to be in crisis. Methods that seemingly used to guarantee perpetual progress now appear to have ground to a halt, and cherished guiding principles have come under suspicion. I contend that it is not science, as such, that is in crisis, but that we are facing the limits of a set of background assumptions—atomism, realism, and the view from nowhere. Luckily, these are far from essential for the scientific endeavour, and I propose a notion of interstitial realism to put science on more flexible footing. Along the way, I describe a tabletop experiment that can be performed at home to recapitulate creation out of (nearly) nothing, and an argument demonstrating that ChatGPT and its ilk don't know what they're talking about.
Jochen Szangolies
Discuss on Forums
View All