| ABOUT US | ARCHIVES | LINKS | RSS FEED | MONDAYS | |

3quarksdaily

An Eclectic Digest of Science, Art and Literature

« Communication and the brain – Don’t Worry, It’s Science: There’s A Brain Scan | Main | The Inscrutable Brilliance of Anne Carson »

March 15, 2013

Did Neil deGrasse Tyson Blow It Big Time?

Albert01

Jerry Coyne over at Why Evolution is True:

This episode smacks a bit of internet drama, which I try to avoid, but it also bears on scientific discourse, censorship, and civility, and I wanted to say a few words.

According to the “Arts Beat” site of the New York Times, Neil deGrasse Tyson, who organized a prestigious debate on the origins of the universe at The American Museum of Natural History, subsequently withdrew an invitation to one participant: the physicist/philosopher David Albert. Last April I wrote about how Albert had given a pretty negative review to Lawrence Krauss’s new book, A Universe from Nothing: Why there is Something Rather Than Nothing (a book that I wasn’t too keen on, either, but for different reasons). And, sure enough, Albert and others—including Krauss—had been invited to debate the topic of how something comes from nothing at the Museum.  Then came the rude gesture:

The annual Isaac Asimov Memorial Debate is the American Museum of Natural History’s biggest public event, drawing sold-out crowds for an evening billed as bringing together “the finest minds in the world” to debate “pressing questions on the frontiers of scientific discovery.”

But this year’s installment, to be held March 20 under the heading “The Existence of Nothing,” may also be notable for the panelist who disappeared.

Among the speakers will be several leading physicists, including Lawrence M. Krauss, whose book “A Universe from Nothing: Why There Is Something Rather Than Nothing” became a cause célèbre in the scientific blogosphere last spring after a scathing review in the New York Times Book Review by the philosopher David Z. Albert.

But Mr. Albert will not be onstage, having been abruptly disinvited by the museum several months after he agreed to take part.

 

Posted by Robin Varghese at 12:10 AM | Permalink

Comments

Tyson (based on what I've seen on TV, heard on the radio and read in his writings) is a national treasure, and Albert (based on firsthand experience) is kind of a sleazy douchebag.

Posted by: X | Mar 15, 2013 2:27:58 AM

So this is the news.

Oh.

Posted by: MikeB | Mar 15, 2013 4:05:41 AM

When scheduling a debate on scientific matters (admitting, as we should, that scientific knowledge is not advanced via debates), is there any meaningful distinction between inviting a philosopher and inviting a theologian??

Posted by: giotto | Mar 15, 2013 11:36:41 AM

Being concerned about all the idiots that don't get up in front of an audience -- any audience -- is a category error.

Posted by: kirk | Mar 15, 2013 2:11:47 PM

X, you smear and give no reason, which seems sleazy, no?

Posted by: flowers rainbows | Mar 15, 2013 2:33:11 PM

giotto's post, a demonstration in why it is useful to have a philosopher participate in these discussions.

Posted by: flowers rainbows | Mar 15, 2013 2:34:58 PM

I don't know what your "firsthand experience" of David Albert is, X, but he was my PhD adviser at Columbia and about as far from sleazy as it is possible to be. He holds a PhD in physics from Rockefeller University and has published many papers in Quantum Theory. So the idea that he is some confused philosopher who has no idea what physics or science is really about is ludicrous. He IS a physicist. And a damn good philosopher.

Posted by: Abbas Raza | Mar 15, 2013 5:58:13 PM

Flowers Rainbows: I'm all ears. . . What does philosophy,as opposed to theology, contribute to the study of the origins of the universe??

Posted by: giotto | Mar 16, 2013 1:29:46 AM

Well, I'm also out of Columbia and had the misfortune of seeing him interact with some of my female friends, which may have slanted my impression of his relative sleazy douchebagginess. I didn't interact with the guy personally all that much, so if you say he's cool, I'll take your word for it. When I was a kid, I enjoyed reading his book, but as an adult physicist (eesh, I'm going to blow my anonymous cover trying to defend my snarky bullshit...) I haven't agreed with much of his philosophy lately. Anyway, if you want to pick sides between Tyson and Albert, I've picked mine.

Posted by: X | Mar 16, 2013 5:48:19 PM

We all really like the word science created in the 19th century by William Whewell to distinguish natural philosophy from other disciplines like theology. Looking at intellectual history you'll notice what is referred to as science now was philosophy and today science is loaded with unexamined philosophical assumptions by scientists. In any case, a philosopher can arguably demonstrate a physicist pulled a line about the Universe coming from nothing out his ass which is (arguably) not much, but isn't nothing. Feel free to not care about philosophy and you can assume science will tell us how to live morally, what values to have, and everything else like why to give a damn about the first milliseconds of the Universe in the first place. A couple links I didn't pull out my ass but are readily available for people that are sincerely interested in this discussion..
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/scientific-realism/

http://rationallyspeaking.blogspot.com/2012/04/lawrence-krauss-another-physicist-with.html

http://www.iep.utm.edu/category/s-l-m/science/

Posted by: flowers rainbows | Mar 17, 2013 9:13:55 AM

Ahhh, smearing a man because he was talkin' to your females, eh? LOL.
White knighting it for the ladies..
I'd bet he maybe indicated he found them attractive?? and wasn't particularly smooth about it AND/or they weren't interested so therefore because either A) he lacked game -social skill, and/or B) females weren't attracted, he therefore deserves to be publicly smeared on a popular internet site. Nice. And you just took their word for it? Watch that.. no disrespect intended but women can be let's just say unfair, sometimes, sometimes. (Also C) there's always jealously or insecurity, conscious or not on the part of rival males)

Posted by: flowers rainbows | Mar 17, 2013 9:26:25 AM

Post a comment






Subscribe to this blog's feed  

PayAnywhere with iphone credit card swiper

Android Tablet

Bluetooth Headset

2013 New Style Dresses

Compare Car Rental Prices

DHgate.com Wholesale

3QD on Facebook

3QD on Kindle

3QD by Daily Email

Receive all blogposts at the same time every day.

Enter your Email:


Preview 3QD Email

3QD on Twitter

Miscellany

Lijit Search

AddThis Social Bookmark Button

Add to Google

Recent Comments

Louise Gordon on The need for critical science journalism

Stuart Mathieson on REFLECTIONS ON WOOLWICH

Kai Matthews on The Moral Status of Rocks

Norman Costa on Dear Guardian: You’ve Been Played

Dave Ranning on REFLECTIONS ON WOOLWICH

Joel Grant on Why Rational People Buy Into Conspiracy Theories

musafir on REFLECTIONS ON WOOLWICH

Norman Costa on Race Is Not Biology

Geoff on REFLECTIONS ON WOOLWICH

Kai Matthews on Why Rational People Buy Into Conspiracy Theories

fallensparks on REFLECTIONS ON WOOLWICH

jon s on Race Is Not Biology

musafir on REFLECTIONS ON WOOLWICH

musafir on Faith Healing

Dave Ranning on REFLECTIONS ON WOOLWICH

Geoff on REFLECTIONS ON WOOLWICH

Luke Lea on Race Is Not Biology

fallensparks on REFLECTIONS ON WOOLWICH

Luke Lea on Race Is Not Biology

jo smith on REFLECTIONS ON WOOLWICH

jo smith on Guy de Maupassant

Geoff on Jeremy Scahill & Noam Chomsky on Secret U.S. Dirty Wars From Yemen to Pakistan to Laos

Jim on Friday Poem

JF on REFLECTIONS ON WOOLWICH

Jesse on REFLECTIONS ON WOOLWICH

Acclaim For 3QD


"I couldn't tear myself away from 3 Quarks Daily, to the point of neglecting my work. Congratulations on this superb site."—Steven Pinker, Johnstone Professor of Psychology, Harvard University.

"I have placed 3 Quarks Daily at the head of my list of web bookmarks."—Richard Dawkins, Charles Simonyi Professor of the Public Understanding of Science at Oxford University.

"Just wanted you to know I’m one of many who reads and enjoys 3 Quarks....almost daily."—David Byrne, musician, former lead-singer of the Talking Heads, artist, intellectual.

Read more here.

The 3QD Prizes

Subscribe to this blog's feed