Law of the land

Posted here (week 1558).

John Brockman’s “What’s Your Law?” has garnered quite some attention. Some of the greatest minds of today have offered their own proverbs and truths; it’s quite a good read. It’s also overwhelmingly lengthy, but being stuck home ill over the weekend I read the whole thing and want to save a few gems.

In the off-the-wall category, Stuart Hameroff tries to revive Cartesian dualism:

The sub-conscious mind is to consciousness what the quantum world is to the classical world. Sir Roger Penrose…and I have put forth a specific model of consciousness involving quantum computation in microtubules within the brain’s neurons.

while Nancy Etcoff wisely warns against any dualism:

Instead, of acting in opposition, in nature two forces are likely to be dependent, interactive and interwoven; sometimes they are merely two names for the same thing.

Andy Clark is also espouses generalism:

Everything leaks.

Edward O. Laumann asserts that monogomy is healthy:

Moderation in levels of partnered sex activity is the mode for the bulk of humankind and is consistent with high levels of subjective well-being. Low levels of subjective sexual well-being is associated with poor physical, emotional, and mental health.

Leo Chalupa’s Second Law is depressing:

…there is a price to pay for originality and every working scientist knows this is the case.

Roger Schank explains open-mindedness:

The good news is that for some people, failure to comprehend is the beginning of understanding. For most, of course, it is the beginning of dismissal.

Beatrice Golomb is a bit defeatist:

Everything in biology is more complicated than you think it is…

…which might contradict Gerwitz’s Law for science, from someone not noteworthy enough for Edge:

The cause is simpler than you expect.

and has a corollary:

The effects are more complex than you can measure.