Francis Bacon and the Scientific Method

Francis Bacon (1561–1626) was a leading figure in the fields of natural philosophy and scientific methodology. He was a lawyer and member of Parliament and rose to the rank of Queen's Counsel under Elizabeth I and Lord Chancellor under James I. His political career ended in disgrace (and brief imprisonment in the Tower of London) when he was found guilty of accepting bribes.

He wrote on questions of law, state and religion, and contemporary politics. However, today he is best remembered for his work on systemising the gathering of scientific knowledge. He emphasised the importance of inductive reasoning and in doing so developed the scientific method as we know it today. Although the Royal Society (the world's first scientific institution) was not founded until 1660, after his death, he is widely credited as its inspiration.

Logicomix

Logicomix is a graphic novel written by Greek writer Apostolos Doxiadis and theoretical computer scientist Christos Papadimitriou of the University of California, Berkeley. It follows the life of British philosopher and mathematician Bertrand Russell and his attempt to unite mathematics under the umbrella of logic - what became known as "the Foundational Quest", together with his friends Alfred North Whitehead and Ludwig Wittgenstein.

Russell was a quiet, intelligent, introspective man who was haunted by the demons of depression and dissatisfaction with being unable to complete his life's work. Indeed, one of the book’s recurring themes is the connection between logic and madness. Russell himself was surrounded in his family by mental illness, and several of the logicians and philosophers who appear in the story went insane or suffered from mental instability.

Below is the book's glossary which gives the background to a number of the topics that appear in it and its main characters. It gives a nice summary of the work of most of the main figures in logic throughout history:
Logicomix Glossary

Even More Optical Illusions

Works best as a larger image. Click on the picture to enlarge it:

If I could walk and talk and squeak and squawk with the animals...

A while ago I posted some thoughts about communication and language in animals and the work of various researchers in this field (particularly the case of Koko the Gorilla). Here is a BBC article which discusses other examples, particularly efforts to "talk" with dolphins.

It seems to me that, while it is perfectly possible for humans to communicate with animals, their ability to use language (the animals, not the researchers) is far from being proven and (as it says in the article below), we are still a far cry from the world of Dr. Dolittle.


Will We Ever Talk to the Animals

Bilingualism and Brain Function

In this article for the New York Times, the writer looks into claims that children who speak more than one language generally have better brain power. This is a strong claim and goes against perceived wisdom that teaching a second language to a child could interfere with clear thinking and decision-making. One of the academic studies cited in the article can be found in full here.

Why Bilingual People Are Smarter

The Danger of a Single Story

The Monty Hall Problem

The Monty Hall Problem is a 'veridical paradox' (something which seems to defy intuition - as with the Achilles and the tortoise paradox). It was invented (discovered?) by Marylin Vos Savant and first published in Parade Magazine in 1990. It is named after US game show host Monty Hall, although other than supplying his name he has nothing to do with the problem.

In the game show you must chose one of three doors. Behind one is the star prize, and behind the other two are (for some reason) goats. You've chosen one of the doors, hoping that the car is behind it, but if you've chosen badly, you get the goat.

Monty then teases you by opening one of the two unselected doors and revealing a goat (he always chooses a losing door), and he offers you the option of switching doors.

The question is: is there an advantage in switching doors? Should you change your choice in order to increase your chances of winning the car.

The intuitive answer is that there is no advantage in changing your mind, since it seems there is now a 50/50 chance that you will win the car. However, it turns out that given this type of choice you should change your mind. I have found a nice program here that proves the point. It is a simulator in which you can run the scenario automatically up to 1000 times, electing either to keep your original choice or change your mind each time.

If this still seems counter-intuitive, this guy explains it much better than I can, in terms of probabilistic outcomes: