James Burke : The Day The Universe Changed: "In The Light Of The Above", 1 of 5 (CC)

[spelech1]

Why is there a disclaimer at the beginning of all of the episodes that this is "a personal view by James Burke" - why is this considered just "his opinion" as if it undermines the validity of the arguments?

[wanderliscious]

I finally noticed that the tune playing at the intro is "It's a Small World After All" :o

[Angryjolly]

Can someone explain who henry Arthur Bedford Halverson is? I'm almost sure an African american named Garrett Morgan invented the traffic light. Though I am almost sure I am not as smart as the host either. I just really want to watch these but legitimacy is kinda blown from the start.

[trollathlete]

@Angryjolly G. Morgan did patent a version of a traffic signal. There were several people working on it in different ways in different countries. Morgan's was more directed towards keeping pedestrain safe. Halverson owns the British patent.

I could drone on and on, but you asked a pretty cool question and have done nothing to deserve my droning.

[dreasim]

I watched these on WTTW PBS when i was young, and it was the most interesting thing i ever watched and effected my outlooks. They hold up to time and pay tribute to JB's foresight by knowing the past. Masterpieces. Thanks for making these available.

[jaymoe67]

@mosescotton lol You mean aside from the aquaduct, laws, and all that rot. Yes, Reg, what have the romans ever done for us?

[ElliotWrightMusic]

I forget the order in which the episodes are supposed to run for this series - I know that 'The Way We Are' is supposed to be episode 1, but I don't recall the rest of the order...

[johnnybean]

Wow. I used to love this show as a child. Just remembered it and thought I would check if it was available here. Just the last three comments alone are amazing. A real conversation on YouTube, Amazing. Love it.

[vulpecula999]

get those f*** adverts off !!!! - what is it with therse tossers ?

[calif92627]

What the hell happened here. When I saw this when it was new the stop light went red and a camel train passed across his path before it went green. In the interview James Burke talked about how the light and the cammels were syncronized. That was my favorite part. Whrer did it go.

[DaveKovacs82]

Wish I could turn off the subtitle/captions.

[fremandn]

I can hit the red CC button next to the volume control and they go away.

[DaveKovacs82]

Thanks!

[UppruniTegundanna]

Is that some Brian Eno I hear?

[DaveKovacs82]

It's a false dichotomy. Objects in the universe can still have significance beyond themselves. The problem comes from those who insist on a particular interpretation of this significance in spite of evolving evidence.

Due to 1) Recent advancements in the evidence, and 2) The Kantian Revolution, there is a tendency to believe that there must be no significant meaning. In fact, it could just mean we need to update our understanding of things.

[JamesBurkeWeb]

I guess you'd have to explain what "significance" means... I believe it is a relative term. Objects in the universe (if we can call them that) only have significance with regards *to* "something / someone".

My daily income say, is of significance *TO* me, but not necessarily to you.

In that sense objects in the universe, whatever they are (real or not) *do* have significance beyond themselves. In fact they can *only* have significance beyond themselves. Otherwise the term seems meaningless.

[DaveKovacs82]

True, to signify--that is, to make known--does imply a knowing mind. So when I see this tree it signifies just that---this tree. But it also signifies the essence of tree itself. But not in the Platonic sense of some immaterial ideal tree out there some where in the mysterious world of forms---rather, the idea of tree which exists in my mind and any mind with whom I communicate about trees.

In other words, you can I can talk about this tree, but we can also talk about trees in general.

[JamesBurkeWeb]

Right. So, in the most friendly way possible, I would simply state that, since the term applies to all objects in the universe, it is essentially a meaningless term *in it's own right*.

If it has a quantitative aspect (ie. more or less significant) then it can be used to measure one object against another "in that sense" (ie. relative to one or more points of reference).

In that case I suppose the term has meaning within some finite/fixed realm of concern/cognition.

- JBW

[mosescotton]

@JamesBurkeWeb "But, what Have the Romans ever done for us?" M.P.

[ELuhn]

The yellow light is the funniest part, if you think about it.

[Thornfox]

What's sad is that we still have people attempting to read the world as symbols.

[JamesBurkeWeb]

Keep in mind that "we" (meaning the rationalist Greek-based societies) do it too though. We need symbols to represent the world or else we can't synthesize a model of the world in our heads (or on paper) that we can decipher and comprehend.

But I think what you are referring to are those who engage in things like "numerology" where they seek understanding in the Platonic sense where the world must fit a magic pattern and disregard the universe as the ultimate arbiter. And that *is* sad.

- JBW

[AlgaeNymph]

7:31 for what Thornfox is talking about.

[tnecklover]

This was a series!

[JamesBurkeWeb]

Ya, they don't make-em like this anymore!

- JBW

[CanadianKelley]

"An ex-nightclubber and Bishop named Augustine"...hilarious!