When we solve a mathematical problem, the foremost thing to check is do we have the proper mathematical tools (theorems etc.)? If we are solving a differential equation, do we know enough theorems and lemmas and procedures for differential equations?
One can go a level deeper.
Do we have the proper mental tools to solve the mathematical/scientific problems we face? Turns out, we don’t.
The recent spate of philosophy posts reminded me of an essay by Steven Pinker, where he argued that our mind was not at all adapted to the pondering of complicated questions about the world, the universe and other philosophical/scientific arguments.
Apparently the evolution of our large brains was all about figuring out out how other organisms would behave. So that you get enough resources in a resource-starved environment or something. Metaphorically speaking, pondering upon complicated philosophy is akin to taking a tool originally designed to cut leaves, and using it as an industrial lathe. Some might find this humbling. Yet others might find it invigorating – given how powerful our brains are, imagine how powerful a tool designed for higher functions might be!!
Nonetheless, one has to feel for our poor brain, instead of the 2 + 2 it was meant for, one tortures it with 7 * 6!
>>figuring out out how other organisms would behave.
that would mean in another million years the evolution of man and his brain would be truly complete. Since, now we are pitted against humans for survival.
>>powerful a tool designed for higher functions might be
I never doubted that, my brain thinks up of the most impossible situations.
2+2=4. 7*6=42.
ah there simple math + coffee. what better way to kickstart the neuron machinery.
🙂 Good point. Reminds me of the fact that humans hardly use up 2% of their brain capacity in an average lifetime.