“The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.” – Nikola Tesla
Something to consider while conducting genetic engineering, space science and coastal sprawl and while … blogging.
On a related note, monetary constraints, i.e. budgets, have been known to encourage clear, as opposed to deep, thought.
What do you think?
Update: Yes, I mean for this to start some clear (and deep) discussion on the city/state/national administration’s right to shrink New Orleans into something manageable versus people’s rights to claim their homes. For starters, should any level of government claim responsibility for “frontier” rebuilding in disaster-prone areas?
Was Tesla actually referring to politicians?
No, I was referring to how scientists who view the New Orleans Rebuild problem can think on it in a deep manner as opposed to a clear one. My comment about budget constraints emerged from working for a large corporation in which science and profitability combine in a business situation – science, real science, doesn’t really suffer in a corporate climate when done from a clear standpoint as opposed to a deep one. Science for results instead of scientific philosophy. Again, I don’t mean to say that deep science or academic science is esoteric and unnecessary, far from it … I mean the corollary that corporate science or science performed with a business goal in mind is not bad.
I also extended the statement to how easy it is to think deeply and not clearly on the problem of New Orleans, be ye a politician or a lab rat.
Does that make any sense?
It makes a lot of sense. This is a driving reason for my desire to be in the part of New Orleans that works now, the strip along the river, and to be a part of the nexus of the reconstruction.
I’m pretty certain that the city will be built from the inside out.
The question of whether or not to temper rebuilding is a good one to raise, and to flog. How do people feel?
makes perfect sense to me, but then again I have been accused of being insane.
i think an interesting concept is that clear thinking and deep thinking often arrive at the same endpoint, even by different routes.
an off the cuff response to your original query:
the rebuilding and reengineering of NOLA requires mostly clear thinking:
– this cannot happen again so get the levies right: the good of the many outweigh the needs of the few (who originally made that quote, Marx?)
– this cannot happen again so move the people out of the most prone areas: sometimes the role of a governing structure (political, social, religious) is to think for the people and make decisions for them, even if the people don’t like it
– this cannot happen again because if it does, it will be tough tiddies for NOLA: no matter what is done, the gov’t and country will say “oh well, move out”
deep thinking, in my opinion, takes more time than NOLA has, and will likely arrive at a similar endpoint to clear thinking. it will also raise scores of ethical issues that simply are not practical.
in this age of advanced engineering, the low-lying areas should have been put back to green space 30 years ago, but it was not practical. now it is. go to it.