Brief history of science from Aristotle, Galileo, Bacon, Descartes to Max Weber, Foucault
Theories of Science: Induction, deduction
Critical thinking of science
3. ABOUT US
FOUNDED 2005 to help SOLVE PROBLEMS THAT MATTER
and so contribute to a world that works for all
We believe STRATEGIC INNOVATION, driven by
creative leadership & enabled by innovation
cultures, is the most POWERFUL TOOLSET FOR
SYSTEMIC change on the planet
We are a networked business - ensuring full
alignment & values match with each project
We create the container & space for optimal
learning, growth & transformation for leaders,
teams & orgs
4. WHAT WE DO
BREAKTHROUGH INNOVATION
BREAKTHROUGH LEADERSHIP
BREAKTHROUGH CULTURES
for a brilliant world
6. If breakthrough was easy, everyone
would be doing it... and they are not.
Why?
We can't solve problems by using the
same kind of thinking we used when
we created them.
Albert Einstein
12. âIf you want to lose weight, donât eat. This is not
medicine, itâs thermodynamics. If you take in more than
you use, you store it.â
MAYOR MICHAEL BLOOMBERG
13.
14.
15.
16. âThe previous belief of many lay people and health
professionals that obesity is simply the result of a lack
of willpower and an inability to discipline eating habits
is no longer defensible.â
RICHARD L ATKINSON, EMERITUS PROFESSOR OF MEDICINE AND
NUTRITIONAL SCIENCES, THE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN;
EDITOR OF THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF OBESITY
17. âAll calories are not equal.
We are increasingly understanding that attributing
obesity to personal responsibility is very simplistic.â
JONATHAN C K WELLS, PROFESSOR OF CHILD NUTRITION,
UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON
19. Though everyone endorses science when it can cure
disease, monitor the environment, or bash political
opponents, the intrusion of science into the territories of
the humanities has been deeply resented. Just as reviled
is the application of scientiïŹc reasoning to religion. In
the major journals of opinion, scientiïŹc carpetbaggers
are regularly accused of determinism, reductionism,
essentialism, positivism, and worst of all, something
called âscientism.â
STEVEN PINKER, THE NEW REPUBLIC
22. âThe hunt for the origins of modern science has long
been a favourite occupation of historians. They differ
widely about the key moment which saw scienceâs birth,
tracing it to the philosophers of Classical Greece, or
celebrating the canonical achievements of 17th-century
heroes such as Galileo, Bacon, Descartes, Boyle and
Newton, or insisting with great plausibility that until at
least the early 19th century, the typical institutions and
techniques of the natural sciences simply didnât exist.
These different stories depend on widely divergent
versions of what distinguishes the scientiïŹc enterprise,
whether method, personnel, hardware or expertise.â
SIMON SCHAFFER
24. âThis year the world is
witnessing the most satisfying
phenomenon that astronomy has
ever provided, an event unique to
this day, changing our doubts
into certainties, and our
hypotheses into
demonstrations.â
THE ACADEMY OF SCIENCES
37. âScience originated from the fusion of two old
traditions, the tradition of philosophical
thinking that began in ancient Greece and the
tradition of skilled crafts that began even
earlier and ïŹourished in medieval Europe.
Philosophy supplied the concepts for science,
and skilled crafts provided the tools.â
FREEMAN DYSON
45. âThere are and can be only two ways of searching into
and discovering truth. The one ïŹies from the senses
and particulars to the most general axioms, and from
these principles, the truth of which it takes for settled
and immoveable, proceeds to judgment and to the
discovery of middle axioms. And this way is now in
fashion. The other derives axioms from the senses and
particulars, rising by a gradual and unbroken ascent,
so that it arrives at the most general axioms last of all.
This is the true way, but as yet untried.â
FRANCIS BACON
47. âTruth is sought for its own sake. And those who
are engaged upon the quest for anything for its
own sake are not interested in other things.
Finding the truth is difïŹcult, and the road to it is
rough.â
IBN AL-HAYTHAM
60. âWe may regard the present state of the universe as
the effect of its past and the cause of its future. An
intellect which at any given moment knew all of the
forces that animate nature and the mutual positions of
the beings that compose it, if this intellect were vast
enough to submit the data to analysis, could condense
into a single formula the movement of the greatest
bodies of the universe and that of the lightest atom; for
such an intellect nothing could be uncertain and the
future just like the past would be present before its
eyes.â
PIERRE SIMON LA PLACE
77. âIn the long history of humankind (and
animal kind, too) those who learned to
collaborate and improvise most
effectively have prevailed.â
CHARLES DARWIN
82. â[I]t seems probable that most of the grand
underlying principles have now been ïŹrmly
established and that further advances are to be
sought chieïŹy in the rigorous application of these
principles to all the phenomena which come
under our noticeâŠ. An eminent physicist has
remarked that the future truths of physical
science are to be looked for in the sixth place of
decimals.â
ALBERT MICHELSON, 1894
93. âHe is responsible for the shameful
backwardness of Soviet biology and of
genetics in particular, for the dissemination
of pseudo-scientiïŹc views, for adventurism,
for the degradation of learning, and for the
defamation, ïŹring, arrest, even death, of
many genuine scientistsâ
ANDREI SAKHAROV
102. âThe means of communication, the irresistible
output of the entertainment and information
industry carry with them prescribed attitudes and
habits, certain intellectual and emotional reactions
which bind the consumers to the producers and,
through the latter to the whole social system. The
products indoctrinate and manipulate; they
promote a false consciousness which is immune
against its falsehood...Thus emerges a pattern of
one-dimensional thought and behavior.â
HERBERT MARCUSE
112. PROCESS
FIND CURIOUS PHENOMENA / QUESTIONS
OBSERVE A LOT
MAKE UP A THEORY
DESIGN EXPERIMENT TO TEST THEORY
ANALYSE
TELL EVERYONE ABOUT IT
REPEAT (BY OTHERS)
121. WHAT IS YOUR HYPOTHESIS?
WHAT PREDICTIONS MIGHT YOUR
THEORY HOLD TRUE?
WHAT EXPERIMENTS COULD YOU RUN
TO TEST IT?
WHAT DATA MIGHT YOU WANT TO
COLLECT?
131. âScience is an inherent contradiction â systematic
wonder â applied to the natural world. In its mundane
form, the methodical instinct prevails and the result, an
orderly procession of papers, advances the perimeter
of knowledge, step by laborious stepâŠÂ Who knows how
many scientiïŹc revolutions have been missed because
their potential inaugurators disregarded the whimsical,
the incidental, the inconvenient inside the laboratory?â
THE GENERAL THEORY OF LOVE
133. âScience is not formal logic - it needs the free play
of the mind in as great a degree as any other
creative art. It is true that this is a gift which can
hardly be taught, but its growth can be
encouraged in those who already possess it.â
MAX BORN
134.
135. âThe most beautiful experience we can have
is the mysterious - the fundamental emotion
which stands at the cradle of true art and
true science.
EINSTEIN
148. ââI am come in very truth leading to you Nature with
all her children, to bind her to your service and make
her your slave.ââ
FRANCIS BACON
152. âAnd God said: Let man have dominion of
the ïŹsh of the sea, and over the fowl of the
air. and over the cattle, and over all the
earth, and over every creeping thing that
creepeth over the earth.â
GENESIS 1, 26
161. âHow odd it is that anyone should not see that
all observation must be for or against some
view if it is to be of any service!â
CHARLES DARWIN
170. âFor is it not possible that science will create a monster?
Is it not possible that an objective approach that frowns
upon personal connections between the entities
examined will harm people, turn them into miserable,
unfriendly, self-righteous mechanisms without charm or
humour? "Is it not possible," asks Kierkegaard, "that
my activity as an objective [or critico-rational] observer
of nature will weaken my strength as a human being?" I
suspect the answer to many of these questions is
afïŹrmative and I believe that a reform of the sciences
that makes them more anarchic and more subjective is
urgently needed.â
PAUL FEYERABEND
172. âIt is a calamity that the use of experiment has severed
nature from man, so that he is content to understand
nature merely through what artiïŹcial instruments reveal
and by so doing even restricts her
achievements...Microscopes and telescopes, in actual fact,
confuse man's innate clarity of mind.â
GOETHE
174. âThe fate of our times is characterized by
rationalization and intellectualization and, above
all, by the 'disenchantment of the world.' Precisely
the ultimate and most sublime values have
retreated from public life either into the
transcendental realm of mystic life or into the
brotherliness of direct and personal human
relations.â
MAX WEBER, 1918
181. âA new scientiïŹc truth does not triumph by
convincing its opponents and making them
see the light, but rather because its
opponents eventually die, and a new
generation grows up that is familiar with it.â
MAX PLANCK
188. â'It is imperative that we give up the idea of
ultimate sources of knowledge, and admit that all
knowledge is human; that it is mixed with our
errors, our prejudices, our dreams, and our hopes;
that all we can do is to grope for truth even though
it is beyond our reach. There is no authority beyond
the reach of criticism.â
KARL POPPER
191. âThe positivist thesis of uniïŹed science, which
assimilates all the sciences to a natural-scientiïŹc
model, fails because of the intimate relationship
between the social sciences and history, and the fact
that they are based on a situation-speciïŹc
understanding of meaning that can be explicated
only hermeneutically ... access to a symbolically
prestructured reality cannot be gained by
observation alone.â
JURGEN HABERMAS
194. âWhich speaking, discoursing subjects â
which subjects of experience and knowledge
â do you want to âdiminishâ when you say:
âI who conduct this discourse am conducting
a scientiïŹc discourse, and I am a scientistâ?â
MICHEL FOUCAULT
198. IRRATIONAL
beliefs driven by
emotions
SYSTEM favors
predictability
(surviving) over
creativity (thriving)
Sources: Antonio DâAmasio, Baba Shiv,
Andrew Newberg, Jonathan Haidt
199. âEmotions are mechanisms that set
the brains highest goals... they
probably evolved because they were
hard to fake.â
Steven Pinker
200. RIGID
less neural plasticity as age
so rely on old
favor predictability over
spontaneity
even data does not dissuade
us
Source: ScientiïŹc American
202. âUntil we invent time-travel and really get a
handle on the multiverse, science tells us little
about history, for example. Science may be able
to tell us why we like music, why certain types of
sound appeal more than others, but not why Bach
is the best.â
A REALIST PHILOSOPHY OF SOCIAL SCIENCE: EXPLANATION AND
UNDERSTANDING
203.
204. TRUTH
WHO OWNS IT?
WHAT DO THEY GET FROM IT?
HOW DOES IT FEEL?
IS THAT FEAR / PATTERN OR INTUITION?
205. âIn Aristotleâs words phronesis is a âtrue state,
reasoned, and capable of action with regard to
things that are good or bad for man.â
Phronesis goes beyond both analytical,
scientiïŹc knowledge (episteme) and technical
knowledge or know-how (techne) and involves
judgments and decisions made in the manner of a
virtuoso social and political actor.â
BENT FLYVBJERG
206. SCIENCE
INCREDIBLE - VERIFIABLE EXPLANATIONS FOR MANY EVENTS
LIMITED - LOOKS FOR LINEARITY WHERE NON-LINEARITY RULES:
CREATIVITY, MIND/BODY CONNECTION, QUANTUM, COMPLEX
SYSTEMS, CULTURE, HAPPINESS