The Next Fifty Years of Science
Description
The scientific method which provides us with so many technological goodies does not resemble the science of 1600. Ever since Bacon, science has undergone a slow evolution. Landmarks in the history of the scientific method are the invention of
libraries, indexes, citations, controlled experiments, peer review,
placebos, double blind experiments, randomization, and search among
others. At the core of the scientific method is the structuring of
information.
In the next 50 years, as the technologies of information and
knowledge accelerate, the nature of the scientific process will change
even more than it has in the last 400 years. We can't predict what
specific inventions will arise in the next 50 years, but based on
long-term trends in epistemic tools, I believe we can speculate on how
the scientific method itself -- that is, how we know -- will change in
the next five decades.
Lecture rating
| People found this lecture: | ||
| Worth seeing | ||
| because it is: | ||
| Valuable and informative | ||
| Well presented | ||
| Easily understandable | ||
| Acceptably recorded | ||
| You need to login to cast your vote. | ||
Report a problem or upload files
If you have found a problem with this lecture or would like to send us extra material, articles, exercises, etc., please use our ticket system to describe your request and upload the data.Enter your e-mail into the 'Cc' field, and we will keep you updated with your request's status.
Link this page
Would you like to put a link to this lecture on your homepage?Go ahead! Copy the HTML snippet !






this is the good site for sharing knowledge and information spreading.i like very much
What do google do to frighten speakers? The ambiance, facilities, lighting, colour scheme etc are awful and stressing the presentation. Ruins an interesting point of view.
He loses the audience by not getting to the point. Like Kelly says "when are we going to have flying cars" is the real draw and you can't just wait for ten minutes then write this off.
Google need to watch CSI for how to engage an audience in a 45 min science talk.
Otherwise its interesting but all made up with little support and no academic rigour.
Key question not answered is what determines or directs the future of science, is it the random developments or is it the money. Does MIT, Cambridge and Oxford determine the future of science or Microsoft, DARPA, Glaxo, Dow, GE, Google etc
...yawn