I like the way you link arrogance with curiosity, sometimes ambitious projects feel arrogant (how can I think I can do something distinguished researchers around the world haven’t done?), but if not tried I would never know if that curiosity would lead to something worthwhile
It's worth thinking about the side of curiosity because this supposed "arrogance" stands in the way of great discoveries (and robotic inventions). There are two types of failures in imagining and creating the future. Arthur C. Clarke famously said two of these, 1. Failure of nerve, which is basically refusing to believe even when facts are presented, and 2. Failure of imagination, which is the inability to conceive how future inventions will allow for even other inventions in the future. One famous example was the airplane and how many famous scientists refused to believe it was possible. The same thing happened with space flight, even when people like Goddard had put the facts down.
Failure of imagination isn't too "blamable" because it is harder to predict, but failure of nerve harms the future greatly, especially when it tells future young inventors that it cannot be done because "distinguished" researchers couldn't do it.
I'll end with Clarke's first law:
“When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is possible, he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is impossible, he is very probably wrong.”
Take care, Mr. Chris, and I hope you create the "impossible"!
I like the way you link arrogance with curiosity, sometimes ambitious projects feel arrogant (how can I think I can do something distinguished researchers around the world haven’t done?), but if not tried I would never know if that curiosity would lead to something worthwhile
Hello Mr. Chris,
It's worth thinking about the side of curiosity because this supposed "arrogance" stands in the way of great discoveries (and robotic inventions). There are two types of failures in imagining and creating the future. Arthur C. Clarke famously said two of these, 1. Failure of nerve, which is basically refusing to believe even when facts are presented, and 2. Failure of imagination, which is the inability to conceive how future inventions will allow for even other inventions in the future. One famous example was the airplane and how many famous scientists refused to believe it was possible. The same thing happened with space flight, even when people like Goddard had put the facts down.
Failure of imagination isn't too "blamable" because it is harder to predict, but failure of nerve harms the future greatly, especially when it tells future young inventors that it cannot be done because "distinguished" researchers couldn't do it.
I'll end with Clarke's first law:
“When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is possible, he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is impossible, he is very probably wrong.”
Take care, Mr. Chris, and I hope you create the "impossible"!