A Quantity of Opinions

This should be the opening for one of those stupid "blah blah blah- my life is so profound, here's why:" posts that compose some absurdly high percentage of all the contents on the internets (the s is intentional), but I can't bring myself to be that self-absorbed (will someone with advanced training in logic please inform me of whether or not that statement is a non-sequitor?) (also, never let it be said that I ever let the opportunity for a good parenthetical remark go to waste).

In deference to the above, please imagine the following conversation taking place in Victorian England:

"I say old chap, I do believe I have stumbled across the difference in education between the humanities and the sciences!"

"By Jove, lets hear it: Please good sire, do continue!"

"Of course my good man, its quite simple really. The further one advances in a humanities field, let us for the sake of discussion say, political science, and although I realize some may take offense at such a characterization I will continue unapologetically in my stereotypically English fashion. The higher one advances in the realm of the sciences political the more opinions one is apt to hear. In fact it is extremely difficult to engage in philosophical discourse with anyone who is not an expert. Consequently, much of one's work consists of sifting through the multitude of diverse and similar opinions and forming one's own composite thoughts to be rendered in eloquent language and published in well respected printed works.

On the other hand, when one advances to the higher levels of science, the fewer opinions one tends to hear. In fact, rise far enough, and nobody is an expert. One's thoughts must be distilled from instinct, and pried from the grip of Nature's laws. To illustrate the point, imagine two scientists, let us say they are both optical physicists, having a conversation about their respective fields of research. Both can have spent their lives studying the same physical laws, both can have a vast understanding of the known physical phenomena, and both are very nearly in exactly the same field, but neither one has the slightest clue what the other is talking about. Even when they write down their ideas the situation is almost hopeless because all the letters in the Roman and Greek alphabets and all their multitudinous permutations are insufficient to express even the most basic physical constants science has discovered. As a result, neither one is able to ever fully come to terms with what the other is saying, and in all discussions there will always be a teacher and a pupil. Compare this, my dear man, with the combatant nature of political discourse, where each side is buts its own army, attempting to vanquish the foe's stronghold of reason with a fusillade of arguments."

"Dear Lord, I think you're on to something. Come, let us share a brandy and discuss it further..."

More on this to follow...