5 ms·
They didn't. How has Mozart aged? If you're worried that science had made this book obsolete in any way - don't. It's philosophy, not applied science.
by Paul_S 5y ago
They didn't. How has Mozart aged?
If you're worried that science had made this book obsolete in any way - don't. It's philosophy, not applied science.
- colechristensen 5y agoLots of philosophy ages badly too. Or, in other words, becomes science. Philosophy is full of demonstrably false ideas where science has caught up and been able to test and find the truth of something, especially in the areas of philosophy of mind.
- Paul_S 5y agoGranted, popular opinion on consciousness has changed since this was written, but what scientific finding has changed since that contradicts the book's ideas?
- Symmetry 5y agoI'd recommend the book Consciousness and the Brain for a recent-ish (2014) take on what science currently knows about the easier problems of consciousness at least.
- wpietri 5y agoEven philosophy can age badly, so I'm not sure that holds. But I think of Jaynes's book as if not science, at least science-adjacent. It's definitely on the wild, fuzzy, not-even-proper-hypotheses end of the scale. Maybe we can compromise on the old term "natural philosophy". Which is fine, honestly. Somebody else here compared him with Freud. Exploratory thinking about the natural world can still be worth reading even if much of it later turns out to be incorrect.