| ▲ | tptacek 4 hours ago | |||||||||||||
One way to differentiate between an art or a craft and a science is that if a genie appeared and offered to trivialize all the discovery work of your career and simply give you the answers today, and you'd say "no", you're probably not doing science. | ||||||||||||||
| ▲ | lioeters an hour ago | parent | next [-] | |||||||||||||
Not even wrong. Real scientists say "yes" to the genie with all the answers? And artists and crafts people don't? The entire statement is nonsense, and offers no insight into art or science. It's almost like a language model generated a plausible sentence that is grammatically correct but has no relation to the real world. Perhaps if the analogy was between science and engineering.. A plumber would say "yes" to the genie that solves the problem immediately, if he/she got paid for the work instead of the genie (or the corporation providing the genie service). In that case the plumber is redundant and unnecessary, the customer can just ask the genie directly. A scientist would say "no" because the whole point of science is the knowledge and understanding, which is gained by the process of discovery and not given on a silver platter. | ||||||||||||||
| ▲ | srcreigh 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | |||||||||||||
An impressive number of things don’t make sense about this thought experiment. Whatever the genie says wouldn’t have much to do with the life you live afterwards, since your life changes after hearing the info. One persons careers worth of discovery work is not that much. A lot of work is dependent on the state of the world and can’t be moved into the past, even language changes. Someone could still do a craft or science or whatever afterwards— assuming life continues to have surprising complexity, the genie could only ever just scratch the surface. | ||||||||||||||
| ▲ | jckt 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | |||||||||||||
Disregarding the competing definitions of “science”, a significant value in mathematical work is “the journey”. The truth or falsehood of individual results are rarely as important as the machinery developed to deliver it. If all the genie did was tell you something was true or false, the only learning you gain is to backtrack and develop the machinery yourself. To a certain extent this is true of the other sciences too. | ||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
| ▲ | coffepot77 an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] | |||||||||||||
Persian Curse seems to apply here “May your every desire be immediately fulfilled.” | ||||||||||||||
| ▲ | loose-cannon an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] | |||||||||||||
there's a human element in discovery and in problem solving. Whether or not somebody chooses to sidestep work isn't necessarily an indication that the work isn't science. It's just an indication that some people are passionate and invested in performing the work. | ||||||||||||||
| ▲ | blueflow an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] | |||||||||||||
math never was a science to begin with. | ||||||||||||||
| ▲ | joe_the_user an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] | |||||||||||||
The only "fields" where a genie appearing and doing all your work for you are fields (jobs) where you only about the money at the end. There are some fields where a serious practitioner might be happy to have a genie do all the "grunt work" (though what people that is varies - I'm not sure what "discovery work" means here but it doesn't matter since present AI promises to do everything in the future if not now). And this analogy breaks down further given that both the real now genie and the hypothetically more powerful genie of the future would each work for your (ex) employer. | ||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
| ▲ | 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | |||||||||||||
| [deleted] | ||||||||||||||