As a scientist what is your view of the following quote from Shakespeare's Hamlet and how does that view.....
956821
I have often thought about this. To sum up my thoughts briefly – \n\nThere are four levels of knowledge. \n\nThe first level of knowledge are things “you know you know”.  These are items of knowledge such as how to drive a car or that the moon goes around the earth.  \n\nThe next level of knowledge are things “you think you know”. These are items like “it will rain on Tuesday” or (if you are a flat-earther) “the world is flat”.  \n\nThe next level of knowledge are things “you know you don’t know”.  For most people this is a vast area of knowledge.  For me it’s things like is there life on mars, or string theory uses.\n\nAnd finally, there is the level of knowledge are things “you don’t know that you don’t know”.  I think that Shakespeare was talking about these items.  Items that fall in this category are outside your knowledge and philosophy.  You can never know these.  I believe there are many things in Heaven and Earth that fall into this category.
1183129
I've never seen that before, but it's an intriguing statement.  I can see the truth in it in a way.  If you prefer to turn a blind eye to issues or bury your head in the sand, you are doomed to extinction.  The ones who speak up and fight for what they believe in are the ones who will change and shape the world.  There's some good food for thought here.
494662
Pundits use this quote as "the ultimate expression of humility in genius," but what they miss (and almsot everyone else too) is that Newton wrote that line to a very, very short man, a hunchedbacked fellow scientist with whom he was having a bitter feud.  Newton wrote a long letter to Robert Hooke on Feb 5, 1675, defending himself from charges of intellectual piracy, praising Hooke for trifles, and then Newton built to the famous quote "standing on the shouldersof giants" line. (adapted from a line about pygmies in the then-famous book called Anatomy of Melancholy.)  \nTranslation:  "While I admit to building on the work of my scientific predecessors, I certainly didn't learn anything from from a dwarf like you!"
780969
Question: Where are you going to find an authentic sample of his cells?\n\nNo, it's not ethical, but it would most certainly be done if the scientists thought they had an authentic viable sample. \n\nPeople would kill to get their hands on it. One to protect the sample from being debased by science, another in the belief it will heal or provide immortality, one to see if the clone would have perfect morality and miraculous powers, one to prevent the sample or clone from becoming an object of worship, one to keep Jesus a mystery only attestable to by faith, one to prevent the other from getting it... each would have thier own motivation.
859414
"Humans represent just one tiny, largely fortuitous, and late-arising twig on the enormously arborescent bush of life."\n\nI assume it is the phrase "largely fortuitous" that Wells objects to. Arguably, this opinion is more philosophical than scientific (though it's also arguable that it isn't). Still, one phrase in one quote in an interview that is peripheral to the main text hardly seems worth getting overexcited about. It doesn't mean that the treatment of evolution, or of human evolution, in that textbook is not accurate.
661117
I think Saul of Tarsus was correct when he poetically observed that "we see through a glass, darkly". Our perceptions are a single mode of reality, but there are other modes that we cannot percieve directly, such as the world of the very small and the world of the very large. We must use the scientific method and instruments to enable us to indirectly extend our ability and percieve the things that we can't otherwise observe, but that do have a bearing on our lives nonetheless.\n\nI find it very interesting that the world of human perception is in the middle of the world of things, including size, velocity, temperature, and light, among other possible characteristics of the universe. The extremes extend to both sides of our perceptual abilities, both above and below. I think this is philosophically significant, but I have yet to ascertain exactly what that significance is.
812818
Its beautiful, its elegant and it  holds promise. Its true that its some what stagnant in last few years but that doesn't mean we should start disbelieving it. If you cannot test something  experimentally that does not mean that it is incorrect.  You can refute something straight away only when you have proved it to be wrong.  While  thinking about a theory of everything, we must always keep a open mind. We should also for similar reasons give heed to other attempts towards a theory of everything.
210050
My favorite quote from The Matrix is from Agent Smith:\n\nI realized that you're not actually mammals. Every mammal on this planet instinctively develops a natural equilibrium with the surrounding environment but you humans do not. You move to an area and you multiply and multiply until every natural resource is consumed. The only way you can survive is to spread to another area. There is another organism on this planet that follows the same pattern. Do you know what it is? A virus. Human beings are a disease, a cancer of this planet. You are a plague, and we are the cure.
22980
looks at it.\n\n\nBut I'm finding that there are confilcts over who said it originally.  I have found both Emerson and Thoreau as being quoted.
364842
The references to Hamlet.  According to A.C. Bradley's theory of Hamlet, Hamlet's heroic characteristic was his powers of observation.  I picked up on the similarites between the movie "V for Vendetta" and Hamlet after V repeatedly says that the female character is "very observant".  \n\nBoth V and the female character were "reborn" in their own way.  V was reborn through the flames of the medical experiment facility.  The female Character was reborn after her UNREAL experience, but became a new person after she came to the conclusion that she should not be afraid. \n\n This is very similar to Hamlet, where Hamlet's fater the former king rose from the dead and from Purgatory.  Purgatory is similar hell, because Hamlet's fater complains of the Horrors that he must experience during the daytime.  Hamlet through out the play is liveing an UNREAL life.  He is constanlty hiding his thoughts and intentions from everyone he knows just as the female character does from the facist society that she lives in.  Hamlet is reborn by realizing that "readyness is all", meaning that the world is waiting for you and you need to live in the moment.\n\nHamlet's father came from a Hell-like place just as V did.  Hamlet avioded conflict at all costs and had the "Heart of a Poet" just as the female character did.\n\nMany countries banned the play Hamlet, because it was about overthrowing a king.  This is similar to what that rediculous NY Times reporter said about the movie.
226262
What research have you done to back your "hypothesis". If your observations are based on your environment, maybe you should change it. It seems as though you might be talking from the perspective of one who watches to much television and has a limited scope of the world at large.
903246
Hogen, a Chinese Zen teacher, lived alone in a small temple in the country. One day four traveling monks appeared and asked if they might make a fire in his yard to warm themselves.\n\nWhile they were building the fire, Hogen heard them arguing about subjectivity and objectivity. He joined them and said: "There is a big stone. Do you consider it to be inside or outside your mind?"\n\nOne of the monks replied: "From the Buddhist viewpoint everything is an objectification of mind, so I would say that the stone is inside my mind."\n\n"Your head must feel very heavy," observed Hogen, "if you are carrying around a stone like that in your mind."
174196
The gravedigger! Quote from Hamlet: \n  Clown. What is he that builds stronger than either the mason,\nthe\n    shipwright, or the carpenter?\n  Other. The gallows-maker; for that frame outlives a thousand  \n    tenants.\n  Clown. I like thy wit well, in good faith. The gallows does\nwell.\n    But how does it well? It does well to those that do ill. Now,\n    thou dost ill to say the gallows is built stronger than the\n    church. Argal, the gallows may do well to thee. To't again,\ncome!\n  Other. Who builds stronger than a mason, a shipwright, or a\n    carpenter?\n  Clown. Ay, tell me that, and unyoke.\n  Other. Marry, now I can tell!\n  Clown. To't.\n  Other. Mass, I cannot tell.\n\n                 Enter Hamlet and Horatio afar off.\n\n  Clown. Cudgel thy brains no more about it, for your dull ass\nwill\n    not mend his pace with beating; and when you are ask'd this\n    question next, say 'a grave-maker.' The houses he makes lasts\n    till doomsday. Go, get thee to Yaughan; fetch me a stoup of\n    liquor.
591399
Wow:  Thanks for the info about the DNA.  For those readers that wondered how the world comes into being without God creating what He alone is able and willing, such info as the DNA, let alone the rest of the whole complex of Created mass and masterpieces, it rests on this issue.  You see, you think, and you understand.  OR you see, and refuse to see, you think and you refuse to think, and you refuse to understand.  Part of that matter of Free choice.  The simple fact is, what you choose to believe is also part of the gift you were given in Creation.  You believe or not, and amazing, it gives you a part in the rest of the community.  There are adequate numbers of unbelievers, that will all affirm your faithlessness, just as there are adequate numbers of believers who will affirm your believe in pagan cult, just as there are adequate numbers of believers in Islam, or Christianity or any other form religion.  Numbers however, doesnt affirm factuallity.  Flat world theorists believe it.  Round world hanging in space believe it.  Sun circling the earth believers affirm it, as do earth circling the sun believers affirm their bit of observation.  \n   Did Noach go searching for the animals?  No, the Text says, according to Moses, affirming that GOd instructed him to write, that God caused the animals to come to the ark.  Noachs job was to build it and stock it with grain and grass, as all the animals would eat vegetarian while aboard, including Noach and family.  Is that possible?  Depends on how you view and believe.  Impossible for those who refuse to believe that GOD was involved.  Possible for those that choose to believe in such miracle process or natural process.   It is all amazing, no matter what you believe.  If you believe God created, thats amazing.  From my point of view thats acceptable.  What would be more amazing is to try to figure out how all this world in all its complexity came into being without a Creator God, since it is obviously more complex than any human can contrive.  Heck,,,we cant even create a blade of grass from nothing, let alone a human eye..or the rest of a human being.\n   The story of the group of scientists who were all working on a grand assignment, to duplicate life...and one day they all agreed, they had done it.  Accomplished the grand impossible,  they had developed a life form in a petri dish.   Eureka they shouted...we did it.  We dont need GOD any more.   THEN GOD SAID :  Now, try it without anything:  No dirt, no fire, no water, no air and no petri dish.
514179
It's a quote from "Hamlet" by Shakespeare.\n\nWhat seems crazy at first glance (madness) may have a logical pattern or reason (method).
292071
What class was this in? What grade level? What text were you using?  I may be able to help you if I know the context in which the question was raised. I have a feeling that I am not getting all the information you had. Please tell me and maybe I can help. I am an old chemist and microbiologist.
454538
hamlet was insane, so it's hard to know if he really saw the ghosts or not. as nietzsche said: "always there is a drop of madness in love, yet always there is a drop of reason in madness." maybe the insane see what the rest of us won't.