We’ve covered some heavy topics in previous newsletters - can tech build out of the attention economy? What could education look like in the face of AI? Can we build a meaningful community despite the loneliness epidemic? Can we make decisions aligned with our values despite misinformation and collective illusions?

Personally, as a pragmatist, sometimes it’s hard to be optimistic.

When I think of all the existing misaligned incentive structures and challenges to solve each of these issues, it’s a lot.

But one random summer day, inspiration came in an unusual form - a podcast about the laws of physics.

David Deutsch, a physicist at the University of Oxford, made original contributions and discoveries in the theory of competition, quantum theory, and multiverse theory.

David is what you would call “a very smart guy”.

He made a simple proposition (read in the voice of a 70 year old British man):

“If there’s something we can’t do, it’s because the laws of physics say so. And if the laws of physics don’t say, so, we can damn well do it, it’s just a matter of ingenuity.”

This idea has been living in my head rent free for a few months now.

It’s a pretty big statement to make, especially for a scientist.

How do u know what u know

To back up his statement, Deutsch goes back all the way to epistemology, the theory of knowledge. All knowledge begins with a problem, and conjectures on how to resolve the problem.

We make multiple conjectures or hypotheses based on what we know, and then we make test our conjectures and create explanations for what we find.

Let’s say that we were experimenting with how to completely transform our public educational system for instance. One potential conjecture is to say that it’ll all work out in the end, and we shouldn’t worry about it.

Another potential conjecture is to say that some complex problems are unknowable or unsolvable, and that we should just get used to not knowing.

Both of those conjecture’s are bad explanations. They are not sufficient or satisfactory, and both lead to the same outcome - inaction.

They’re also objectively bad explanations because it’s a rationale that can be easily applied to a totally different phenomenon.

For example, some people still believe that giraffes have long necks because they stretched their neck to reach leaves that were higher up in a tree. This has been proven to be false and it’s not a good explanation because it could easily be applied to any other species, like gazelles.

The explanation is not specific enough to explain why giraffes, and only giraffes, have long necks.

A good explanation has to be specific and explain why it happens to this phenomenon but not that phenomenon.

Is it possible to completely transform our public educational system? Given the amount of money, resources, and failed attempts that this issue has taken down, many would say it’s almost impossible or perhaps unknowable.

But Deutsch’s explanation for what’s truly possible is to take the problem in question and test it against the laws of physics.

If a solution doesn’t break the laws of physics, it’s possible. The only things stopping us is our knowledge, creativity and ingenuity in how to surmount the obstacles.

In Deutsch’s words, “there is no other impediment possible.”

Imaginative optimism, not pessimism, is the way to build knowledge

To say that anything that doesn’t break the laws of physics is possible is kind of a mind boggling statement.

So much of the world that Millenials and Gen Z have inherited is messed up, and many of us have become jaded, apathetic or detached from the million issues that plague our interconnected world.

The flip side is that we also have access to insane tools to make our ideas, dreams, and beliefs a reality. And here we have one of the most accomplished living scientists telling us that more is possible than we think.

This goes back to this reoccurring theme I’m seeing around the importance of imagination. If we can’t imagine a better or different educational system, we probably won’t do it.

If we lack the knowledge to figure out a solution, all we have to do is test things out, be creative, and make hypotheses about how we think the world could be.

If and when we face conflict in the world, when our hypotheses are challenged, or our life experiments don’t work, it doesn’t mean it can’t happen.

It means we’re on the cusp of creating new knowledge.

Quote of the day

Thanks for reading!

If you felt like this article/newsletter was valuable to you, the best way to support this work is to share it with someone who you think would genuinely enjoy it.

🤘