Freeman Dyson on Everything

I’ve just finished reading an article and interview with the fantastic scientist, philosopher, and author Freeman Dyson over at Salon.com.

Here are a few snippets from the interview:

Salon.com: Physicist Richard Feynman has said that nobody understands quantum mechanics. Has the interpretation of quantum mechanics become a religion among scientists?

Dyson: I wouldn’t say that. For me, the important thing about quantum mechanics is the equations, the mathematics. If you want to understand quantum mechanics, just do the math. All the words that are spun around it don’t mean very much. It’s like playing the violin. If violinists were judged on how they spoke, it wouldn’t make much sense.

You write that as our understanding of biology advances, so too will our understanding of religion.

It impacts upon our understanding of theology. What I was pointing out is that human theology is based on our own value system — above all our knowledge of good and evil as we experience it. Take an autistic child. I took the case of Jessica Park, who is a friend of mine who happens to be autistic. If she had a theology, it would be quite different because she cannot understand other people suffering. She has no conception of other people’s existence in the way we have. It’s a radically different world that she lives in. You can tell by the fact that she can’t understand the difference between “I” and “you.” She uses the words indiscriminately.

So the idea of a suffering savior would have no meaning for her at all. If she had a theology, it wouldn’t involve sin. One thing that is characteristic of autistic people is that they cannot tell a lie. Jessica never tells a lie because to tell a deliberate lie, you have to have the idea of deceiving somebody. That’s something she couldn’t imagine. Since there is no sin, there can be no fall from grace and no redemption.

The example of Jessica shows us how our own view of the world might be equally skewed. There may be many essential features of the world to which we are blind, just as she is blind to other people’s thoughts and feelings. So our theology also reflects our possibly skewed view of the world.

You write about the importance of “heretical thoughts” in the scientific community. What do you mean?

This is mostly about politics. In “A Many-Colored Glass” I came out of the closet as far as global warming is concerned. I believe global warming is grossly exaggerated as a problem. It’s a real problem, but it’s nothing like as serious as people are led to believe. The idea that global warming is the most important problem facing the world is total nonsense and is doing a lot of harm. It distracts people’s attention from much more serious problems. That’s an example. It’s not so much to do about science. It’s really a political question.

So climate change has been politicized?

There is this very strong organization, the IPCC, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. It’s a group of officially anointed experts who produce statements every five years. This community of people is regarded as sacrosanct. And they’re very intolerant. They always regard any criticism as a hostile act that has to be fought. I think they have behaved pretty badly. But that’s rather an unusual case in the world of science — that’s where the politics has corrupted the science. But in general, scientists are not largely against heretics. This is something rather peculiar to climate studies. It also has to do with the way [the studies are] funded. The whole community of climate experts is funded on the basis that it’s an urgent problem. So [they] can’t possibly say it’s not urgent or else they’ll lose their thumbs.

I can really appreciate his perspective on quantum physics. It seems as if quite a few kooks have latched on to this theory and profited from it in a way that the scientists and mathematicians who’ve facilitated the discussion up to this point never will. Doing so in such falsely certain terms is, at the very least, manipulative and may cause a public overwhelmed with poor ideas to pull away if the mathematicians and physicists do begin to convene on something of utility to humanity.

Dyson’s perspective on global warming is one that I hold close to my heart. I too believe that while it is for the most part a cause of humanity’s progress, that creating an over-politicized assault will do more harm than good. The last thing that this country, and indeed the world, needs is more polarization. This creates an environment that is susceptible to the quick marginalization of good, solid science and thought.

I advice that everyone go out and pick themselves up a copy of Freeman Dyson’s new book “A Many-Colored Glass” as well as the work of his son, George Dyson. I’m really looking forward to hearing both of them speak at this weekend’s von Neumann Memorial Lectures at Princeton. I’ll be writing about that sometime next week.