Einstein, the searcher : $b his work explained from dialogues with EinsteinMoszkowski, Alexander
Philosophy
Einstein, the searcher : $b his work explained from dialogues with Einstein
Moszkowski, Alexander
Einstein, Albert, 1879-1955; Relativity (Physics)
We should certainly not have disputed its creative character, for we
should have said that it corresponds to a fact which is fully formed,
but cannot be proved. But now that we know that the fact does not exist
at all, the tiling assumes a different colour. It was not a discovery at
all, but an erroneous conjecture. But one would never be able to arrive
at an erroneous conclusion of this sort without being a mathematical
genius, and having the inspiration of the moment. And from this again it
follows that to make a discovery in the full sense of the word the
intuition of the moment does not suffice, but must be supported by a
series of intuitions, and this is the condition that it become a
permanent component of universal truth.
The fact that Einstein refers to the action of "inventing" in his
explanation, gives support, it seems to me, to the view that, strictly
speaking, discovering and inventing are never to be regarded as being
separable. In discovering, what has to be constructed persists, and in
inventing, it is a question of finding the path along which there is the
promise of success, be it by a method, a proof, or by some general work.
We spoke of works of art, and I was delighted to see that Einstein was
by no means disinclined to claim certain works of pure thought, which
are usually placed in the category of scientific discovery, as works of
art. In the latter, however, the pure process of invention plays the
prominent part, for in them something is represented that did not exist
at all before; this has repeatedly led to the artist's achievement being
given the higher rank, as being properly and exclusively creative. The
argument runs somewhat along these lines: the infinitesimal calculus
would certainly have been discovered even if there had been no Newton
and no Leibniz, but without Beethoven we should never have had a C Minor
Symphony, and never in the future would it have appeared, for it was a
subjective, absolutely personal, and unique product of its creator.
I believe this may be admitted, and that we may nevertheless retain the
view that in the work of art, too, the act of discovering is to be
found. Let us consider for a moment the elementary substance of the
first movement of this fifth symphony, a colossal movement of 500 bars,
which expresses itself quite definitely in four notes, of which one is
repeated three times. "Thus Destiny thunders at the gates" is
Beethoven's motto for this section; it is expressed tonally in a
succession of notes which through all eternity existed among the
possible permutative arrangements of these sounds.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account