4

In Feynman's The Meaning of It All he writes,

[...] What, then, is the meaning of it all? What can we say today to dispel the mystery of existence? If we take everything into account, not only what the ancients knew, but also all those things that we have found out up to today that they didn't know, then I think that we must frankly admit that we do not know. But I think that in admitting this we have probably found the open channel.

Admitting that we do not know, and maintaining perpetually the attitude that we do not know the direction necessarily to go permit a possibility of alteration, of thinking, of new contributions and new discoveries for the problem of developing a way to do what we want ultimately, even when we do not know what we want. [Bold mine.]

In a nutshell, Feynman is saying that the good is defined by the possibility for significant change. Good choices make the future universe more interesting. Poor choices make it more boring.

What is the name of this kind of ethics? Are there other similar ethical systems I can read about?

7
  • 1
    While he certainly seems to be talking about some sort of value, it's not clear to me that it's a moral value. It seems he's simply talking about some sort of prudential value, where the "best" thing to do might not be the moral thing to do (although it certainly could be). Are there more passages that make you think he is speaking about morality?
    – Dennis
    Aug 30 '13 at 17:56
  • 1
    Also, if his account is really that "good choices make the future universe more interesting" then the obvious question is "what makes a given universe 'interesting'?".
    – Dennis
    Aug 30 '13 at 17:59
  • 2
    Existentialism in philosophy and modernism in the arts seem to my mind like some potentially interesting areas to explore here perhaps. --In passing, I'm not sure he's really articulating a formal ethical system of principles here. Rather it may be he's talking about life-practices -- the real and pragmatic value of adopting an openness to change, practicing a disciplined attunement to potentials for transformation, maybe especially in 'ultimate' relationships (with the world, others, yourself, etc.)
    – Joseph Weissman
    Aug 30 '13 at 22:57
  • @Dennis - If we're talking about frying eggs, moral and prudential can be different. However, if we are talking about the meaning of it all, they are the same thing, right? Can acting prudently toward the meaning of existence be anything but good? Sep 3 '13 at 3:31
  • 1
    This sounds like a system where 'the good' is a potentially infinite in description, with people merely 'chipping away' at it, kind of like science chips away at reality by modeling it increasingly well.
    – labreuer
    Oct 11 '13 at 23:15
4

Old saying in Vedanta goes - A man who says he knows does not know; a man who says he does not know, knows. Read Erwin Schroedinger's book What is Life?: with "Mind and Matter" for the philosophical musings of a scientist that influenced Feynman

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.