4 ms·

I not often cynical, but I confess to being uninterested in the "dead ends" of history. Perhaps these are areas though where a historian (or layperson) might fi

I not often cynical, but I confess to being uninterested in the "dead ends" of history. Perhaps these are areas though where a historian (or layperson) might find rich for "what if" speculation. For me it's more like if a tree falls in the woods and no one is there to hear it… The Antikythera mechanism is another one that is uninteresting to me because, whatever it is, it seems to have been a one-off. Maybe, like James Burke's obsession with "connections" in history, I am drawn instead to historic through lines.

dndkdkdkdkdk 7mo ago
[flagged]
user_7832 7mo ago
(I know this isn't exactly your intention, but it's a similar situation.) Do you think that we should give funding to study the mating habits of endangered iguanas in the Sonoran desert, or should we be funding cures for alzheimer's and diabetes? Trick question, it's the same thing! Science often finds weird things in weird places. Shamelessly plagarized from this tumblr post: https://i-draws-dinosaurs.tumblr.com/post/811645777885741056 https://i-draws-dinosaurs.tumblr.com/post/811645777885741056
- JKCalhoun 7mo ago
  No and I have no problem with others being fascinated by history's dead-ends. I was just expressing my own leanings (in case it resonated with others—perhaps not, ha ha).
- bit-anarchist 7mo ago
  They aren't the same thing though. They wield different expected results: - Studying the mating habits of endangered iguanas (or other apparently random research) is about describing real-life phenomenon; - Finding cures for Alzheimer's and diabetes are focused studies that funnel resources towards solving the diseases directly. The first is a breadth-first search that can provide inspiration and unique ideas for further research, and the second is a deep-dive, trying to solve a particular issue. They both have their times and places, but it is important to not paint them as "the same".

dndkdkdkdkdk 7mo ago

[flagged]

user_7832 7mo ago

(I know this isn't exactly your intention, but it's a similar situation.) Do you think that we should give funding to study the mating habits of endangered iguanas in the Sonoran desert, or should we be funding cures for alzheimer's and diabetes? Trick question, it's the same thing! Science often finds weird things in weird places. Shamelessly plagarized from this tumblr post: https://i-draws-dinosaurs.tumblr.com/post/811645777885741056 https://i-draws-dinosaurs.tumblr.com/post/811645777885741056

JKCalhoun 7mo ago
No and I have no problem with others being fascinated by history's dead-ends. I was just expressing my own leanings (in case it resonated with others—perhaps not, ha ha).
bit-anarchist 7mo ago
They aren't the same thing though. They wield different expected results: - Studying the mating habits of endangered iguanas (or other apparently random research) is about describing real-life phenomenon; - Finding cures for Alzheimer's and diabetes are focused studies that funnel resources towards solving the diseases directly. The first is a breadth-first search that can provide inspiration and unique ideas for further research, and the second is a deep-dive, trying to solve a particular issue. They both have their times and places, but it is important to not paint them as "the same".