When I was a sophomore in college I had the most dynamic and interesting professor for a class on the ‘60’s. I was so enthralled with the experience that I met with him to discuss my desire to get my doctorate in history. He allowed me to express my idea and then throughly shot me down. He went on to explain how he could tell that I would not be the type of person who could become obsessed with one tiny idea so much that it would cause me to travel anywhere in the world to read any sort of thing on it, in any dusty musty basement of a library or historical archive, not be able to sleep until I had discovered everything there was to discover about it and that ultimately no one else would give a crap about but me. As he said these words, I tried desperately and unsuccessfully to hold back tears. I was gutted. I went in to that meeting so confidently knowing what I wanted to do with my life and now I had nothing. That conversation was over 30 years ago and it has lived rent free in my head since because he was absolutely right. I had never had someone be so brutally honest with me and as much as I wanted to hate him for his candor, I had to accept the reality of his words. Now, I will confess that it took me awhile, many 10 years, to understand that he did me a great service that day. He forced me to truly think about myself and my abilities for the first time. I have shared this story with many of my students over the years to make them ‘hear’ the ugly truth that they may be avoiding. I’m forever glad to that professor because that conversation led to the path that brought me thirst to teaching and then to administration.
Interesting. My heart aches a bit hearing this. I don’t want to rock your boat too much…but what if he was wrong? What if his impressions of you—which could only have been a few in a 2nd year college class—weren’t really enough for him to go on? What if the confidence of this professor (a fallible human, after all) in this situation was hubris and then it really colored your own view of your self, your inclinations and your potentials? It might be painful at first to consider if there’s some possibility to this, but if some truth lies there—all is not lost. The way things are structured these days is completely changing and ready to be remade in many ways. Perhaps there IS something you’d like to dive deep into in some dusty corner of the world and only share with others after immersing yourself in it and letting it become your whole world for a little while? And then perhaps you’d choose to resurface and share it with others later—or not? Seems like perhaps it could be an interesting thought experiment for you…and then a perhaps even actual experiment to try? Could be a great adventure :). If this clicks somehow and I’m not totally off the mark (which I absolutely could be!), then it’s probably good to remember (in advance, haha) that it’s easy to some things in terms of lost time, but really if we don’t let ideas like that get in the way, the uniqueness of everything in our journey has the chance to actually become something all the richer that one can’t distinctly quantify. Anyway, hope it’s not overstepping to share these thoughts, but I wanted to in case it’s helpful to you. Many blessings to you on your adventures. <3
You are right that that professor might have snuffed out the research career of a potentially great historian, but it need not follow.
He pretty certainly knew that sometimes he would be wrong, but he also knew that most times the students that REALLY had it in them to make great researchers would be back -- sometimes this year, sometimes next.
Those with the Right Stuff would have to face far worse discouragement than a snotty prof before giving up on such a career.
I have found it useful to employ thought experiments when attempting to address some of the very real fact and opinion conflicts in the US right now and navigating "alternative facts" (remember those?). It's a good non-confrontational way to turn the tables tangibly and tease out some absurdities and hypocrisies.
Trying to think of what specific things you might be using it with. Sounds like a fun and enlightening thing worth engaging in groups too. Perhaps a way to claw our way out of the tangled madness? Do you have any examples you feel like sharing?
Thank you for this. In addition to causing me to think outside my usual train of thought, your very interesting post made me think of the movie "Hit Man." The protagonist, a mild-mannered professor called upon to go undercover and impersonate a hit man, is faced with an ethical dilemma and is called upon to examine his belief system.
I love thought experiments, but experimentation in my closest social environment suggests not everyone shares my enthusiasm.
I wonder why that is—is it simply a matter of preference, like an aversion to discuss sports or politics, or might there be a certain skill or ability those who enjoy thought experiments possess, which those who loathe it lack? Or is it an absence of curiosity?
For me one of their more fascinating aspects is the manipulation of the parameters, and how they might tip the balance (although the exact tipping point is often as elusive as the location of the maximum on the Laffer curve).
A genre I find particularly interesting is exploring *when* (ie in what circumstances) we might do the things we declare we would *never* do.
I am enjoying “What would it be like to be a …”. which I found through reading about abductive reasoning. So far no one has wanted to discuss this at the dinner table with me. Strange. 🤣 It’s good for while cleaning or pairing socks (domestic mediation). It’s actually hard thinking at first, but the more you practice you feel perhaps, a tiny shift, dare I say claim a small expansion in outlook? Anyway, I will keep trying so that I can be a philosopher when I grow up.
So true—domestic meditation is one of the best :). I discovered that when I was very little…Yeah—I’m often surprised how little people want to consider other possibilities. Equally so how little they want to fantasize about the world and challenge their assumptions about what’s possible. I’ll be like—what if we turned this highway that’s right along the river into a promenade with hanging vines and let a bit of a wilderness grow, wouldn’t that be beautiful? We could even turn the lower part into the sea wall we’re needing to address the sea level rise. Or I’ll ask, what if you could change anything here—what might you like or love? It can seem outlandish and pointless for many, but I point out that even though to create things like that it would require massive changes, this is how these things begin. Case in point—I was talking about the highway transforming with my mom a few weeks ago and then by chance landed on an article that described how exactly that has happened in Paris—with a highway that borders the Seine, and surely that happened because people stretched their sense of what was possible. We all need to dream and imagine more—at least six impossible things before breakfast, most likely :)
Where do you think that thinking comes from to challenge assumptions? I feel like I think in a similar way to you based on your description, in being able to see possibilities that are sometimes seen as too fantastic. In my case, from a young age too. I have always wondered where this thinking started.
Dumb question; it would be more reasonable to ask what I think about experiments – period.
ALL experiments are exercises in analogy, whether notionally controlled or not.
That is not much of a criticism, because all thought and all argument is from analogy, and up to that pint is good as long as the analogy is not too false, where "too false" means "misleading" (which is not always easy to determine). Someone said "The best material model of a cat is another, or preferably the same, cat", which would have been true, but useless, because you can't have the same cat; the cat you worked on a day ago, or an hour ago, is no longer the same cat. But we are forced to work on mental models in that their key variables have to be "sufficiently isomorphic" (what I would call "plesiomorphic") to the experimental subject, for our conclusions to be valid.
If our models and reasoning are good enough, then using thought experiments will work as well as any other; we can tell perfectly well why it is not practical to balance a steel needle on a polished surface where the shape of the needle is that of a prolate ellipsoid with an aspect ratio of 9-to-1. We can tell that we cannot bounce a vertical stack of three steel spheres one on the other, such that they eventually settle vertically.
And it is cheaper to model it mentally than physically.
Furthermore, in the vast number of cases that demand physical experiments to validate the mental models, if you don't have a mental model while designing the experiments, you should not be designing experiments at all – it is so treacherous a field that I don't know how to sum it up for you.
And to make matters worse, to the laic experiment sounds like one of the easiest, most obvious activities; anyone could do it; it is just a matter of going and having a look to see what happens, right. If you doubt my claim that there is more to it than that, do yourselves a favour and read "The Book of Why" by Judea Pearl and Dana Mackenzie. It should open anyone's eyes.
ANY program of experimentation should begin with thought experiments, but only the most trivial should end before starting the empirical experiments. And any experiments, thought- or empirical, that tell you only what you had intended to ask, or leaves you with nothing more to ask, probably was largely a failure.
Well in the political arena, There’s so many things brought forward by the administration that are so blatantly hypocritical or an about face that it’s pretty easy to find things.
One was an exchange with a vet about Trump taking over Greenland & the firing of a senior officer in Greenland who spoke negatively of Vance’s visit (it was neither public nor violent). My response was that this was an overreach & un-American.
The vet thought it was perfectly acceptable, so I as asked him to imagine how he would feel if it was Biden visiting his base, and firing someone there.
Sad to report I got radio silence back, but that was actually a huge win compared to the usual response!
Love the article and all the thoughtful comments. I hope to get to listening to the interview soon—really busy weekend!…I will have to go with the horse-sized duck. The alternative is tempting—I would surely be giggling for at least a moment, but I’d only stand a chance with one horse-sized duck….Hot versus cold is tricky, but I think cold. There are lots of fun ways to warm yourself up that can involve mindless expenditure of energy. Cooling yourself down takes more concentration…eh—it’s really close either way, but if you can’t alter it I might rather be hot…I guess to the last one—it really makes it’s point. If it’s in hell, given people’s fallibility you and they are likely to be at their worst in some way and not able to really share your love and then if you’re in heaven without them you’re not able to share that love with them either. I feel like I have lived this a bit with my family after a certain level of blissful and then perhaps willful ignorance or a higher perspective in my childhood. Perhaps many or most of us have lived these extremes. And being in connection and having perspective so heaven and hell can meet as they do in reality is the way to a deeper experience. Eternity though? I tend to welcome a break from most people—including myself as I come to be more familiar with myself or set in any particular ways. Perhaps eternity with lots of room for long walks where I can forget everything and feel like I’m suspending time.
"When you imagine future worlds, different but not too different, you often present artistic and extended thought experiments."
When I was a sophomore in college I had the most dynamic and interesting professor for a class on the ‘60’s. I was so enthralled with the experience that I met with him to discuss my desire to get my doctorate in history. He allowed me to express my idea and then throughly shot me down. He went on to explain how he could tell that I would not be the type of person who could become obsessed with one tiny idea so much that it would cause me to travel anywhere in the world to read any sort of thing on it, in any dusty musty basement of a library or historical archive, not be able to sleep until I had discovered everything there was to discover about it and that ultimately no one else would give a crap about but me. As he said these words, I tried desperately and unsuccessfully to hold back tears. I was gutted. I went in to that meeting so confidently knowing what I wanted to do with my life and now I had nothing. That conversation was over 30 years ago and it has lived rent free in my head since because he was absolutely right. I had never had someone be so brutally honest with me and as much as I wanted to hate him for his candor, I had to accept the reality of his words. Now, I will confess that it took me awhile, many 10 years, to understand that he did me a great service that day. He forced me to truly think about myself and my abilities for the first time. I have shared this story with many of my students over the years to make them ‘hear’ the ugly truth that they may be avoiding. I’m forever glad to that professor because that conversation led to the path that brought me thirst to teaching and then to administration.
Interesting. My heart aches a bit hearing this. I don’t want to rock your boat too much…but what if he was wrong? What if his impressions of you—which could only have been a few in a 2nd year college class—weren’t really enough for him to go on? What if the confidence of this professor (a fallible human, after all) in this situation was hubris and then it really colored your own view of your self, your inclinations and your potentials? It might be painful at first to consider if there’s some possibility to this, but if some truth lies there—all is not lost. The way things are structured these days is completely changing and ready to be remade in many ways. Perhaps there IS something you’d like to dive deep into in some dusty corner of the world and only share with others after immersing yourself in it and letting it become your whole world for a little while? And then perhaps you’d choose to resurface and share it with others later—or not? Seems like perhaps it could be an interesting thought experiment for you…and then a perhaps even actual experiment to try? Could be a great adventure :). If this clicks somehow and I’m not totally off the mark (which I absolutely could be!), then it’s probably good to remember (in advance, haha) that it’s easy to some things in terms of lost time, but really if we don’t let ideas like that get in the way, the uniqueness of everything in our journey has the chance to actually become something all the richer that one can’t distinctly quantify. Anyway, hope it’s not overstepping to share these thoughts, but I wanted to in case it’s helpful to you. Many blessings to you on your adventures. <3
You are right that that professor might have snuffed out the research career of a potentially great historian, but it need not follow.
He pretty certainly knew that sometimes he would be wrong, but he also knew that most times the students that REALLY had it in them to make great researchers would be back -- sometimes this year, sometimes next.
Those with the Right Stuff would have to face far worse discouragement than a snotty prof before giving up on such a career.
I see your point—he was sort of playing a game of odds.
I have found it useful to employ thought experiments when attempting to address some of the very real fact and opinion conflicts in the US right now and navigating "alternative facts" (remember those?). It's a good non-confrontational way to turn the tables tangibly and tease out some absurdities and hypocrisies.
Trying to think of what specific things you might be using it with. Sounds like a fun and enlightening thing worth engaging in groups too. Perhaps a way to claw our way out of the tangled madness? Do you have any examples you feel like sharing?
Thought experiments stretch reason’s fabric—playful, yes, but they whisper truths beneath logic’s surface.
Thought Experiments are useful. If only to bring about a change of perspective through discover and discourse
I LOVEDDDDDDDDDD IT! I'm learning a lot THANK YOU
Thank you for this. In addition to causing me to think outside my usual train of thought, your very interesting post made me think of the movie "Hit Man." The protagonist, a mild-mannered professor called upon to go undercover and impersonate a hit man, is faced with an ethical dilemma and is called upon to examine his belief system.
Thanks.
Poetry could be fruitful field for thought experiment.
Thus, the poem "SONNET ON APPROACHING ITALY" by Oscar Wild perfectly reflects author's thought about close coexistence of joy and grief in human life:
I reached the Alps: the soul within me burned,
Italia, my Italia, at thy name:
And when from out the mountain's heart I came
And saw the land for which my life had yearned,
I laughed as one who some great prize had earned:
And musing on the marvel of thy fame
I watched the day, till marked with wounds of flame
The turquoise sky to burnished gold was turned.
The pine-trees waved as waves a woman's hair,
And in the orchards every twining spray
Was breaking into flakes of blossoming foam:
But when I knew that far away at Rome
In evil bonds a second Peter lay,
I wept to see the land so very fair.
Turin
I love thought experiments, but experimentation in my closest social environment suggests not everyone shares my enthusiasm.
I wonder why that is—is it simply a matter of preference, like an aversion to discuss sports or politics, or might there be a certain skill or ability those who enjoy thought experiments possess, which those who loathe it lack? Or is it an absence of curiosity?
For me one of their more fascinating aspects is the manipulation of the parameters, and how they might tip the balance (although the exact tipping point is often as elusive as the location of the maximum on the Laffer curve).
A genre I find particularly interesting is exploring *when* (ie in what circumstances) we might do the things we declare we would *never* do.
I am enjoying “What would it be like to be a …”. which I found through reading about abductive reasoning. So far no one has wanted to discuss this at the dinner table with me. Strange. 🤣 It’s good for while cleaning or pairing socks (domestic mediation). It’s actually hard thinking at first, but the more you practice you feel perhaps, a tiny shift, dare I say claim a small expansion in outlook? Anyway, I will keep trying so that I can be a philosopher when I grow up.
domestic *meditation
So true—domestic meditation is one of the best :). I discovered that when I was very little…Yeah—I’m often surprised how little people want to consider other possibilities. Equally so how little they want to fantasize about the world and challenge their assumptions about what’s possible. I’ll be like—what if we turned this highway that’s right along the river into a promenade with hanging vines and let a bit of a wilderness grow, wouldn’t that be beautiful? We could even turn the lower part into the sea wall we’re needing to address the sea level rise. Or I’ll ask, what if you could change anything here—what might you like or love? It can seem outlandish and pointless for many, but I point out that even though to create things like that it would require massive changes, this is how these things begin. Case in point—I was talking about the highway transforming with my mom a few weeks ago and then by chance landed on an article that described how exactly that has happened in Paris—with a highway that borders the Seine, and surely that happened because people stretched their sense of what was possible. We all need to dream and imagine more—at least six impossible things before breakfast, most likely :)
Where do you think that thinking comes from to challenge assumptions? I feel like I think in a similar way to you based on your description, in being able to see possibilities that are sometimes seen as too fantastic. In my case, from a young age too. I have always wondered where this thinking started.
What do I think about Gedankenexperimente?
Dumb question; it would be more reasonable to ask what I think about experiments – period.
ALL experiments are exercises in analogy, whether notionally controlled or not.
That is not much of a criticism, because all thought and all argument is from analogy, and up to that pint is good as long as the analogy is not too false, where "too false" means "misleading" (which is not always easy to determine). Someone said "The best material model of a cat is another, or preferably the same, cat", which would have been true, but useless, because you can't have the same cat; the cat you worked on a day ago, or an hour ago, is no longer the same cat. But we are forced to work on mental models in that their key variables have to be "sufficiently isomorphic" (what I would call "plesiomorphic") to the experimental subject, for our conclusions to be valid.
If our models and reasoning are good enough, then using thought experiments will work as well as any other; we can tell perfectly well why it is not practical to balance a steel needle on a polished surface where the shape of the needle is that of a prolate ellipsoid with an aspect ratio of 9-to-1. We can tell that we cannot bounce a vertical stack of three steel spheres one on the other, such that they eventually settle vertically.
And it is cheaper to model it mentally than physically.
Furthermore, in the vast number of cases that demand physical experiments to validate the mental models, if you don't have a mental model while designing the experiments, you should not be designing experiments at all – it is so treacherous a field that I don't know how to sum it up for you.
And to make matters worse, to the laic experiment sounds like one of the easiest, most obvious activities; anyone could do it; it is just a matter of going and having a look to see what happens, right. If you doubt my claim that there is more to it than that, do yourselves a favour and read "The Book of Why" by Judea Pearl and Dana Mackenzie. It should open anyone's eyes.
ANY program of experimentation should begin with thought experiments, but only the most trivial should end before starting the empirical experiments. And any experiments, thought- or empirical, that tell you only what you had intended to ask, or leaves you with nothing more to ask, probably was largely a failure.
I'm 86 today, and sorry to say this is new to me. I am eager to learn more.
Well in the political arena, There’s so many things brought forward by the administration that are so blatantly hypocritical or an about face that it’s pretty easy to find things.
One was an exchange with a vet about Trump taking over Greenland & the firing of a senior officer in Greenland who spoke negatively of Vance’s visit (it was neither public nor violent). My response was that this was an overreach & un-American.
The vet thought it was perfectly acceptable, so I as asked him to imagine how he would feel if it was Biden visiting his base, and firing someone there.
Sad to report I got radio silence back, but that was actually a huge win compared to the usual response!
100% horse sized duck.100% cold. You just fall asleep at the end. Numb.
I would love a horse-sized duck, not fight it 😍
Love the article and all the thoughtful comments. I hope to get to listening to the interview soon—really busy weekend!…I will have to go with the horse-sized duck. The alternative is tempting—I would surely be giggling for at least a moment, but I’d only stand a chance with one horse-sized duck….Hot versus cold is tricky, but I think cold. There are lots of fun ways to warm yourself up that can involve mindless expenditure of energy. Cooling yourself down takes more concentration…eh—it’s really close either way, but if you can’t alter it I might rather be hot…I guess to the last one—it really makes it’s point. If it’s in hell, given people’s fallibility you and they are likely to be at their worst in some way and not able to really share your love and then if you’re in heaven without them you’re not able to share that love with them either. I feel like I have lived this a bit with my family after a certain level of blissful and then perhaps willful ignorance or a higher perspective in my childhood. Perhaps many or most of us have lived these extremes. And being in connection and having perspective so heaven and hell can meet as they do in reality is the way to a deeper experience. Eternity though? I tend to welcome a break from most people—including myself as I come to be more familiar with myself or set in any particular ways. Perhaps eternity with lots of room for long walks where I can forget everything and feel like I’m suspending time.