Second order con-science

Philosophy of science

July 23rd, 2006

Philosophy of science is about as useful to scientists as ornithology is to birds.

A quote attributed to Richard Feynman, though published by Steven Weinberg in Nature 330 (1987): p433-. My lying heart likes it as much as it is written from a philosophy of science’s point of view.

Sustainable disfinism

July 22nd, 2006

There are basically two ways to indulge in disfinism — the science of no definition: Don’t provide any definition, or provide a new one for each and every occasion and let everyone come up with their own. Worst of all: Make them differ only slightly. For examples see

World Jump Day

July 16th, 2006

WORLD JUMP DAY 20 JULY 2006 11:39:13 GMT
This is 20 July 2006 13:39:13 CEST in e.g. Vienna.

Join us in the attempt to drive planet Earth into a new orbit, by letting millions of people jump!

Let’s jump!

Let us trust in the power of the human community.


United 93. It’s time.

June 25th, 2006

At the beginning of the film “United 93” it says

It’s time.

It’s time. This is what the crusaders of ecology and sustainability keep telling us, too.

It’s time that we ask what is time.
Never forget.


An Inconvenient Truth

June 23rd, 2006

The film “An Inconvenient Truth” shall come to local theaters in September 2006. What will it be? The Weisslog (weblog in German by Die Zeit) pointed to a related article by Slate Magazine:

Bigger Smash: Hurricanes cause more damage because there’s more for them to wreck. By Gregg Easterbrook, posted Tuesday, June 20, 2006

Being wrong or at least being contradicted always charmingly embraces my
confidence in being right.

Dangerous sustainability

June 19th, 2006

There must be something about sustainability that is pretty scarily dangerous. I have seen quite many projects, institutions, lecture series, websites, forums and more, all about sustainable development, sustainability research, and human ecology, and yet they simply stopped, evaporated, ceased to exist, or got nixed.

Wanna be a scientist?

June 5th, 2006

Check that your criterions are bleeding edge. Be conscious about what you are doing. Define your science. Analyze your methods. Discuss the results, but draw clear distinctions. Exert precision.

Go ahead, take the scissors. Make sure your knifes are sharp. Be careful not to cut yourself, though. And, beware of dichotomies. Cut through them. Eventually, consider philosophy of science. Cut the scissors.

Please, do not hurt anyone. Yes, this includes yourself.

Who to call into question

May 30th, 2006

If one thinks there are people who (should) bear a certain amount of responsibility for what they do and what they do not, that is, if one believes to know who to accuse, then, indeed, there is guilt.