The popularisation of scientific doctrines is producing as great an alteration in the mental state of society as the material applications of science are effecting in its outward life. Such indeed is the respect paid to science, that the most absurd opinions may become current, provided they are expressed in language, the sound of which recals [sic] some well-known scientific phrase.
Interpretation
Scientific ideas are profoundly changing society's mindset, similar to how science has changed the physical world.
James Clerk Maxwell highlights the significant impact that scientific doctrines have on the way people think and perceive the world around them. He points out that society places a high value on scientific knowledge, to the extent that even the most nonsensical ideas can gain acceptance if they are expressed using familiar scientific phrasing. This suggests a deep interplay between scientific language and societal beliefs, illustrating how the perception of science can shape thought processes.
In practice
In a discussion about the influence of science in modern culture, this quote can be referenced to emphasize how scientific language shapes public opinion.
Science appears to us with a very different aspect after we have found out that it is not in lecture rooms only, and by means of the electric light projected on a screen, that we may witness physical phenomena, but that we may find illustrations of the highest doctrines of science in games and gymnastics, in travelling by land and by water, in storms of the air and of the sea, and wherever there is matter in motion.
... that, in a few years, all great physical constants will have been approximately estimated, and that the only occupation which will be left to men of science will be to carry these measurements to another place of decimals.
Very few of us can now place ourselves in the mental condition in which even such philosophers as the great Descartes were involved in the days before Newton had announced the true laws of the motion of bodies.
What's the go of that? What's the particular go of that?
I have also a paper afloat, with an electromagnetic theory of light, which, till I am convinced to the contrary, I hold to be great guns.
If we betake ourselves to the statistical method, we do so confessing that we are unable to follow the details of each individual case, and expecting that the effects of widespread causes, though very different in each individual, will produce an average result on the whole nation, from a study of which we may estimate the character and propensities of an imaginary being called the Mean Man.
My practise as a scientist is atheistic. That is to say, when I set up an experiment I assume that no god, angel, or devil is going to interfere with its course; and this assumption has been justified by such success as I have achieved in my professional career. I should therefore be intellectually dishonest if I were not also atheistic in the affairs of the world. And I should be a coward if I did not state my theoretical views in public.
A theory which is not refutable by any conceivable event is non-scientific. Irrefutability is not a virtue of a theory (as people often think) but a vice.
'Closed timelike curve' is the jargon for time travel. It means you go out, come back and meet yourself in the past.
Nature allows only experimental situations to occur which can be described within the framework of the formalism of quantum mechanics
The only relevant test of the validity of a hypothesis is comparison of prediction with experience.
As a physicist, I've always found cosmology to be a rational elixir; it distances me from ordinary concerns.
Subscribe for the occasional hand-picked quote. No noise.