Science and Einstein’s Brain
|Einstein’s brain was removed from his skull and photographed from different angles before it was sectioned into 240 blocks — all to advance the sciences he loved so dearly. Many of the photographs, however, were lost or misplaced over the decades. Now analysis of 14 recently resurfaced photos reveals what we’ve suspected all along: Einstein’s physical brain, says Doyle Rice at USA Today, “was better than yours.”|
The journalists are making a claim about Einstein’s brain, fine; except that they’re making a claim about Einstein’s brain as compared to my brain! and to your brain!! They took Einstein’s brain from his corpse’s skull, photographed it, cut it up, mapped it. My brain is in my skull, they haven’t photographed it. Have they photographed yours? cut it up?
No? Then how can they compare them? in an article that talks about science?!?!
My school had classes in what they called science. I took the one called Chemistry, and the one called Physics, and Biology. I’d also taken the ones called Algebra, and Geometry … Did I learn any science in school? Not on your life. the school didn’t know what science is: any more than the above journalists know what it is. And the school, and the journalists, assume, that the public cannot be taught what science is. And I guess, unhappily, that they’re right.
I learned science on my own: over the decades since school, by reading some of the great scientists, especially the great science writers, the great explainers: James Frazer, Isaac Asimov, Nigel Calder, Sigmund Freud, Gregory Bateson, Carl Sagan … I wish you had too. or I wish you would.
And I wish the Fundamentalists’ God would step in and forbid any politically-run school system to use the word, ever.
I don’t believe that science can be taught, I don’t believe that science can be learned — by the school system of a centralized coercive kleptocracy; but that doesn’t mean that science doesn’t on occasion emerge naturally: otherwise, where did Newton, Einstein, Jared Diamond, Gregory Bateson … come from?
For that vast majority of you who have no idea what I’m talking about (and who aren’t reading this, couldn’t if you tried, not with understanding, I’ll offer one detail of an analysis:
What the journalist “meant” was that Einstein’s brain was not average. Fine. I don’t doubt that for a moment. But what the journalist wrote was different, the journalist wrote that his brain was both different and better than yours or mine: without examining either yours or mine!
The journalist might as well be counting angels on the head of a pin: with his eyes shut and his mind never engaged.