3 ms·

I'll echo the sentiment of others here in saying that this isn't representive of anyone I know at SU. I'd say it's quite a rational crowd and while Kurzweil and

I'll echo the sentiment of others here in saying that this isn't representive of anyone I know at SU. I'd say it's quite a rational crowd and while Kurzweil and others are a bit on the edge of reason in some of their work on Singularity stuff - it's vastly not blatant wrong facts a la homeopathy. It's at most overoptimism in the factors of exponential growth and supporting tech like cryogenics being more useful than is likely. The Newton reference below is apt - let's judge people on their best contributions - and let only heinous stuff (if Newton ended up a violent dictator) count against them.

akiselev 14y ago
Newton's dablings in the occult SHOULD be considered and count against him. The thing is, we've confirmed calculus and universal gravitation through centuries of experimentation. Whadwha's situation is different. He is alive, a PROFESSOR AT STANFORD, and the VP of academics at SU. His contributions of the past should not be muddied by his current stances, especially if others have corroborated his work (although I don't know if Whadwha does real research). However, if he chooses to believe in homeopathy, something which has been shown time and time again to be as effective as a placebo, it shows a certain lack of intellectual integrity that is not acceptable of a practitioner of higher education. Some of the greatest scientists in the world have been corrupted by their personal biases and if people like Einstein can waste decades in a hunt for something that doesn't exist (i.e., his denial of Bell's theorem and search for a deterministic hidden variable) then surely Whadwha too can fall prey to his biases (which he seems to have shown today). The difference is that Einstein did research that could be corroborated, while Whadwha teaches, which can impact the intellectual integrity of his students.
- abecedarius 14y ago
  Einstein died before Bell discovered his theorem. Careful with the rants about integrity.

akiselev 14y ago

Newton's dablings in the occult SHOULD be considered and count against him. The thing is, we've confirmed calculus and universal gravitation through centuries of experimentation. Whadwha's situation is different. He is alive, a PROFESSOR AT STANFORD, and the VP of academics at SU. His contributions of the past should not be muddied by his current stances, especially if others have corroborated his work (although I don't know if Whadwha does real research). However, if he chooses to believe in homeopathy, something which has been shown time and time again to be as effective as a placebo, it shows a certain lack of intellectual integrity that is not acceptable of a practitioner of higher education. Some of the greatest scientists in the world have been corrupted by their personal biases and if people like Einstein can waste decades in a hunt for something that doesn't exist (i.e., his denial of Bell's theorem and search for a deterministic hidden variable) then surely Whadwha too can fall prey to his biases (which he seems to have shown today). The difference is that Einstein did research that could be corroborated, while Whadwha teaches, which can impact the intellectual integrity of his students.

abecedarius 14y ago
Einstein died before Bell discovered his theorem. Careful with the rants about integrity.