2 Down, 1 To Go

After finally finishing the first two novels that we have to read this semester, The Lost World and The Calcutta Chromosome, which of the two novels did you enjoy more? In retrospect, both novels addressed science differently and each author took a different look at it and approached it differently. In terms of science--since that's what this course is based upon--which novel do you think better incorporated science into the main argument and why/how? Personally, I found The Lost World to be more captivating, because even though it addressed science, it managed to still keep a fictional feel to it, whereas I simply just felt less interested as I read The Calcutta Chromosome. I have also read previous novels by Doyle and I believe him to be a better author, o my opinion may be biased.

Not knowing=Knowledge?

In the Calcutta Chromosome there is this secret group of people/religion that believes the not knowing something is knowledge and that by knowing something you change it and therefore do not really know it. There was also that clip on the double slit experiment in which the particle stopped behaving like a wave when there was an observer. Do you believe that if you know something you change it? Is it the actual object that changes or is it you who changes and views the object differently? What are your takes on knowledge? Also if things we think of as non-living and inanimate like atoms change because of an observer does that mean that our definition of cognitive beings should change?