Jonah Lehrer’s main arguement is that the sciences need the arts. He says that right now we are limited in the way that the sciences are approaching the big questions. We need the arts in order to better understand science, and to lead to more explorations in the field of science.
Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle–asserting a fundamental limit to the precision with which certain pairs of physical properties of a particle, known as complementary variables, such as position x and momentum p, can be known.
The bridging principle–the neural event that would explain how the activity of our brain cells creates the subjective experience of consciousness
Reductionism–the practice of analyzing and describing a complex phenomenon in terms of phenomena that are held to represent a simpler or more fundamental level, especially when this is said to provide a sufficient explanation.
Synapse–a junction between two nerve cells, consisting of a minute gap across which impulses pass by diffusion of a neurotransmitter.
Epiphenomenon–a secondary effect or byproduct that arises from but does not causally influence a process, in particular.
Holistic perspective–means that we are interested in engaging and developing the whole person
Metaphor–a figure of speech in which a word or phrase is applied to an object or action to which it is not literally applicable.
Niels Bohr was an enthusiast of cubist paintings. It was because of this that he came up with the Bohr model of an electron.
M.C. Escher drew the painting Relativity, which shows how art and science could be connected. Just like science, looking at the individual parts of the picture everything seems fine, but when you put them together you get an impossible whole.
You did a good job summarizing Lehrer’s main argument, but I did miss your five minute free write. 3/3