TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Magic died when art and science split

45 点作者 dnetesn12 个月前

3 条评论

keiferski12 个月前
Disenchantment (the term used to describe the loss of magic in the world) is a bit more complicated and started earlier. Charles Taylor’s book <i>A Secular Age</i> is an excellent read if you’re interested in how (and if) it happened:<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;intotheclarities.com&#x2F;2014&#x2F;08&#x2F;23&#x2F;charles-taylor-on-disenchantment&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;intotheclarities.com&#x2F;2014&#x2F;08&#x2F;23&#x2F;charles-taylor-on-di...</a><p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.m.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;A_Secular_Age" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.m.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;A_Secular_Age</a><p>It’s a huge tome but one detail worth mentioning is that Taylor says disenchantment goes back to at least the Reformation (1500s-1600s), as that’s when “strong belief” became more important. Prior to that, religion was essentially on various speeds, with the religious establishment “believing more” and the rest of society believing at a less serious level, content to live in a world of mixed beings, magic, etc. Once the Reformation kicked off, it became much more important to clarify and commit to the beliefs - which also had the unintended result of many people analyzing their beliefs and not believing them anymore.<p>I can’t summarize the whole thing here, but I highly recommend it. I also think Taylor recently published a book about Romantic poetry, which is apt considering the blog post’s discussion of Coleridge.
anthk12 个月前
&gt;Latin was necessary for a professional career, but science was not.<p>With the British industrial revolution, science was almost mandatory.<p>&gt;religious thought became much less central,<p>Well, guess why. Once you get a logical foundation on how the Universe behaves, all of the tribalist, messianic babble goes down the sink.<p>The problem with Humanities&#x2F;Arts is that they love being hideous and fancy instead of being just fine with any truth we found. No metter which side of Politics you choose; they love having biases like nothing so their prejudices stay on top of the facts.<p>Look what happened with Galileo, or the Google guy stating that, yes, there are differences on which careers men and women choose _on average_, (hormones rule us a lot), and then most &#x27;woke people&#x27; began a witch hunt. These people forgot to extrapolate that the more social it&#x27;s a society, with granted rights, (and nurturing&#x2F;caring rights&#x2F;aids), the less the differences will happen on a future. And, yes, education and context plays a huge rule. We are like computers, having civilized &#x27;software&#x27;(evolved social rules, modern law, &#x27;weird&#x27; non-animal customs...) but with outdated hardware (Neolithic era genetics and hormones).<p>That will change over millenia, for sure.<p>Science, OTOH, tries to kill any bias since the beginning.
polotics12 个月前
Obligatory reference: Jason Josephson Storm&#x27;s <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;The_Myth_of_Disenchantment" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;The_Myth_of_Disenchantment</a> explains that it&#x27;s not so simple...